All Things Russia & Ukraine

[Typical Lax Dad]

DoD was opposed (& probably still is) to sending the Patriot,

Thank you!!!! Since even I understand that, it should be EASY for you to both understand and acknowledge that.

ASSUMING (big assumption) you think that the US should have gotten involved in this, and armed the Ukrainians? Biden's played this war as perfectly as possible.

Heck, give credit to the DoD and don't mention Biden if it helps you swallow that pill. Works for me. OF COURSE everyone wishes the war was over, or that there was less death and destruction...or that Putin left Ukraine alone entirely.

But Biden has played the sh*t hand he was dealt damn near perfectly, given all the ridiculous constraints he's dealing with here.
[/quote]My beef with Biden is promising an open ended blank check & not pushing Zelensky & Putin to the table & forcing Z to agree to an off ramp for Putin. Then let Turkey & France take the lead (& heat) for working the details. Let Erdogan take the blame for letting Putin off the hook.

Send him an email. I am shocked that you are upset that he won’t do what you want.

[old salt]

Could you share with us any posts 6 months or longer ago when you were saying we should send them Patriots asap?

I don't recall them, but I'm getting old and foggy at times.

My recollection is more that you were in the camp of not sending more of our highest tech military capabilities, that such would be 'provocative' etc, etc I realize that you may have been talking more about offensive weaponry (I was arguing that such was needed to actually beat back Russia and ultimately force them out) but I don't recall calls from you re Patriot systems.

I never thought Biden would buck DoD on this, which is why I was for giving them to NATO allies to backfill for their S-300's & other Soviet legacy air defense systems. They're not provocative. They're defensive only. They can't strike into Russia like cruise missiles or our drones could. The drones are the technology we don't want compromised. The Patriots are mobile & far enough behind front lines that the odds of them being captured are minimal.

So, you didn't call for Patriots to Ukraine.
But thought sending to other NATO countries was fine...'cause it's ok if Ukraine falls, just not NATO countries...
I saw it as a way to backfill NATO allies, so they'd give up their Soviet legacy systems that Ukraine could use immediately.
Because of DoD's objections, Patriots were never under serious discussion, except for pleas for them from Ukraine & Poland + some Baltic state(s) on behalf of Ukraine. I did not address it because I did not think it was ever within the realm of possibility. I would have been for it if it was ever raised as a possibility. I was surprised that Biden relented. I suspect the damage done by Russia's recent missile barrages has prompted Biden to reconsider & override DoD. Things must be looking grim for Ukraine as a result of the missile & drone attacks on the infrastructure. Like the Predator/Reaper drones & manned aircraft like F-16's, I figured Patriots were off limits. But, if asked, I would differentiate them from those other offensive weapons. I'm enthusiastic now because I think they can be a game changer (& prompt Putin to negotiate) if they can be deployed quickly enough to make a difference.

Yup, I'm in the camp of providing Ukraine with the weaponry we would use to take back Ukraine's territory. Yes, they will have losses...they have a lot now. But winning this faster is better than slower.
It might not matter if we can't stop the missile/drone attacks. That's why all the pleas have switched to air defense systems, rather than for what's needed to mount a counteroffensive. We (Ukraine & US/NATO) are on our back foot right now.

Appeasement is not the answer, especially with these rationales of "it's really Russia anyway"...
It's not appeasement if you can't prevail on the battlefield or if the cost of continuing is prohibitive.

[old salt]

There seems to be a ton of posts by folks who may or may not welcome a crash course on the facts of history in the region. This has been a helpful conversation below for folks who think Putin just decided to start a war “unprovoked.” And while some may feel like they know everything already, I’d still encourage them to listen to a few folks with hundreds of years between them knowing what’s transpired. Just like Listening to the neocons in the current White House helps inform me!

https://youtu.be/uAKI8n4Us7E

That's a disturbing recital. MacGregor sounds sober enough until he starts to devolve into partisan blame/shame near the end.

The Russian "starting point" in this narrative is that their fears of having NATO on their borders is a legitimate fear. It may be legitimate in the mind of the individual dictator, Vlad. A threat to authoritarianism. What if Russia was a more western-like nation, in terms of governance, economy, international relations, etc? A bad thing? What do the actual Russian PEOPLE think of THAT possibility??

MacGregor certainly lays it all out there. We'll soon know if he's right (militarily) or not, ... & I hope that he's not. He does diminish his credibility when he goes beyond the military & national security analysis.

Though I think MacGregor is accurate in thinking that Gen Milley's leak indicates his advice to Biden was that Ukraine has won back as much as they can & a prompt cease fire, frozen conflict & negotiations to end the war are in Ukraine's best interests. ...& that he leaked it because of entrenched neocon opposition in the WH, NSC & DoS.

The first half of the video is really good (imo). Sachs explains the history accurately, from the Russian perspective.
The fear from NATO expansion is not the threat of military invasion, but of fomenting color revolutions in Belasrus, then Russia, as was done in Ukraine.

It would be great if Russia (& Belarus & Ukraine) were liberal democracies like their western neighbors. Our hope is that Ukraine will finally emerge as one. They certainly had the opportunity to develop that way. They chose corruption, oligarchy & authoritarianism instead. At great cost, Ukraine will have another opportunity to show if they've really changed, this time.

[PizzaSnake]

Could you share with us any posts 6 months or longer ago when you were saying we should send them Patriots asap?

I don't recall them, but I'm getting old and foggy at times.

My recollection is more that you were in the camp of not sending more of our highest tech military capabilities, that such would be 'provocative' etc, etc I realize that you may have been talking more about offensive weaponry (I was arguing that such was needed to actually beat back Russia and ultimately force them out) but I don't recall calls from you re Patriot systems.

I never thought Biden would buck DoD on this, which is why I was for giving them to NATO allies to backfill for their S-300's & other Soviet legacy air defense systems. They're not provocative. They're defensive only. They can't strike into Russia like cruise missiles or our drones could. The drones are the technology we don't want compromised. The Patriots are mobile & far enough behind front lines that the odds of them being captured are minimal.

So, you didn't call for Patriots to Ukraine.
But thought sending to other NATO countries was fine...'cause it's ok if Ukraine falls, just not NATO countries...
I saw it as a way to backfill NATO allies, so they'd give up their Soviet legacy systems that Ukraine could use immediately.
Because of DoD's objections, Patriots were never under serious discussion, except for pleas for them from Ukraine & Poland + some Baltic state(s) on behalf of Ukraine. I did not address it because I did not think it was ever within the realm of possibility. I would have been for it if it was ever raised as a possibility. I was surprised that Biden relented. I suspect the damage done by Russia's recent missile barrages has prompted Biden to reconsider & override DoD. Things must be looking grim for Ukraine as a result of the missile & drone attacks on the infrastructure. Like the Predator/Reaper drones & manned aircraft like F-16's, I figured Patriots were off limits. But, if asked, I would differentiate them from those other offensive weapons. I'm enthusiastic now because I think they can be a game changer (& prompt Putin to negotiate) if they can be deployed quickly enough to make a difference.

Yup, I'm in the camp of providing Ukraine with the weaponry we would use to take back Ukraine's territory. Yes, they will have losses...they have a lot now. But winning this faster is better than slower.
It might not matter if we can't stop the missile/drone attacks. That's why all the pleas have switched to air defense systems, rather than for what's needed to mount a counteroffensive. We (Ukraine & US/NATO) are on our back foot right now.

Appeasement is not the answer, especially with these rationales of "it's really Russia anyway"...
It's not appeasement if you can't prevail on the battlefield or if the cost of continuing is prohibitive.

"Like the Predator/Reaper drones"

I'm betting the older Reaper drones will be going within a week or two. It's old tech so it's not the end of the world if it is compromised.

[Kismet]

I'm giving Biden credit for FINALLY doing this . ...it's just 6 mos too late. I want the war ended asap & this will help/

Exactly what I've been saying: you want Biden to be PERFECT. In your world, he and his advisors aren't allowed to think, or consider options and the consequences of their actions. He has to shoot first, think later, and if he doesn't, you're all over him.

How many times have you mocked me, saying "the perfect is the enemy of the good".

Funny how you failed to mention that 48 hours ago.

[MDlaxfan76]

Could you share with us any posts 6 months or longer ago when you were saying we should send them Patriots asap?

I don't recall them, but I'm getting old and foggy at times.

My recollection is more that you were in the camp of not sending more of our highest tech military capabilities, that such would be 'provocative' etc, etc I realize that you may have been talking more about offensive weaponry (I was arguing that such was needed to actually beat back Russia and ultimately force them out) but I don't recall calls from you re Patriot systems.

I never thought Biden would buck DoD on this, which is why I was for giving them to NATO allies to backfill for their S-300's & other Soviet legacy air defense systems. They're not provocative. They're defensive only. They can't strike into Russia like cruise missiles or our drones could. The drones are the technology we don't want compromised. The Patriots are mobile & far enough behind front lines that the odds of them being captured are minimal.

So, you didn't call for Patriots to Ukraine.
But thought sending to other NATO countries was fine...'cause it's ok if Ukraine falls, just not NATO countries...
I saw it as a way to backfill NATO allies, so they'd give up their Soviet legacy systems that Ukraine could use immediately.
Because of DoD's objections, Patriots were never under serious discussion, except for pleas for them from Ukraine & Poland + some Baltic state(s) on behalf of Ukraine. I did not address it because I did not think it was ever within the realm of possibility. I would have been for it if it was ever raised as a possibility. I was surprised that Biden relented. I suspect the damage done by Russia's recent missile barrages has prompted Biden to reconsider & override DoD. Things must be looking grim for Ukraine as a result of the missile & drone attacks on the infrastructure. Like the Predator/Reaper drones & manned aircraft like F-16's, I figured Patriots were off limits. But, if asked, I would differentiate them from those other offensive weapons. I'm enthusiastic now because I think they can be a game changer (& prompt Putin to negotiate) if they can be deployed quickly enough to make a difference.

Yup, I'm in the camp of providing Ukraine with the weaponry we would use to take back Ukraine's territory. Yes, they will have losses...they have a lot now. But winning this faster is better than slower.
It might not matter if we can't stop the missile/drone attacks. That's why all the pleas have switched to air defense systems, rather than for what's needed to mount a counteroffensive. We (Ukraine & US/NATO) are on our back foot right now.

Appeasement is not the answer, especially with these rationales of "it's really Russia anyway"...
It's not appeasement if you can't prevail on the battlefield or if the cost of continuing is prohibitive.

First of all, it sure looks like Ukraine is prevailing on the battlefield. They have multiple offensives underway, Russian morale is horrendous...that said, there's going to be some back and forth, mostly stalemate until after winter...unless there's a surprise.

I realize that you want, and have wanted from inception, for Russia to regain its 'lost vassals' as the preferred option to war.

My point is that you were silent about Patriots, its hypocritical to condemn Biden, or DoD for that matter, when you wanted Ukraine to simply surrender land in exchange for 'peace', a possibility that's never even been remotely on the table from Putin. The only peace he's offered is elimination of Ukraine as a sovereign nation.

[old salt]

I'm giving Biden credit for FINALLY doing this . ...it's just 6 mos too late. I want the war ended asap & this will help/

Exactly what I've been saying: you want Biden to be PERFECT. In your world, he and his advisors aren't allowed to think, or consider options and the consequences of their actions. He has to shoot first, think later, and if he doesn't, you're all over him.

How many times have you mocked me, saying "the perfect is the enemy of the good".

Funny how you failed to mention that 48 hours ago.

So I cheered the decision without specifically mentioning Biden.
If I had, I would have had to include -- " better late than never ".

[njbill]

“Fear of NATO” is pure Putin balderdash. As everybody knows, Ukraine is not a member of NATO. Also, NATO is a defensive treaty. NATO hasn’t invaded anybody ever. Nobody was going to invade Russia, although it might happen now due to what will go down in history as Putin‘s folly.

The Serbs & Afghans would disagree.

Serbia is a complex situation to be sure, but NATO got involved there to try to stop ethnic cleansing and war crimes among other things. I think history will judge that it was the right thing to do. I don't think anyone at NATO or elsewhere was suggesting NATO should invade Russia to stop whatever Putin was doing to the Russian people.

An attack on our country was launched from Afghanistan. The party in power (the Taliban) was harboring the terrorists. Did we stay too long? Yes, in my view, but I don't see Putin's "fear" of a NATO invasion (at least prior to his latest invasion of Ukraine) being comparable to what we (and NATO) did at least at the outset in Afghanistan. In one instance our biggest city was in effect bombed from fighters in Afghanistan. Putting Crimea aside, what attacks had Russia launched that could reasonably have precipitated an attack on Russia? Should he fear one now? Possibly, but he is 100% responsible for that. As bad as the invasion of Crimea was, I don't think NATO seriously considered invading Russia. And Putin knew that. The comparative lack of the world's response to Crimea is (I believe) something that emboldened him to attack Ukraine proper.

But let's call a spade a spade here. Putin doesn't "fear" a NATO invasion (at least before he launched his latest war against Ukraine). He invaded to try to reconstitute the old Soviet Union. And he had no intention of stopping in Ukraine. He'd have gone after the Baltic states and (I believe) maybe Poland or further if he could. Maybe not now as his supposedly vaunted army has been shown to be a house of cards.

But let's get back to whether Putin had a reasonable fear of an invasion from NATO. Are you saying he did? To what do you point to support that? I just don't think there was any possibility at all that NATO would invade Russia. And possibly start WWIII? I just don't see it.

Does he not like missiles pointed at him? I'm sure he doesn't, just like the Ukrainians, the Poles, the Germans, and the French don't like missiles pointed at them. Pointing missiles isn't the same as firing them or invading a neighboring country though.

I've said this before: an entirely different leader of Russia could have worked to foster trade with Ukraine and Europe. Rich markets are available on both sides. Russia could have made Ukraine a friendly (at least friendly-ish) neighbor and been able to maintain its decades long right to Sebastopol (well into the 2040s) which is now at risk.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Could you share with us any posts 6 months or longer ago when you were saying we should send them Patriots asap?

I don't recall them, but I'm getting old and foggy at times.

My recollection is more that you were in the camp of not sending more of our highest tech military capabilities, that such would be 'provocative' etc, etc I realize that you may have been talking more about offensive weaponry (I was arguing that such was needed to actually beat back Russia and ultimately force them out) but I don't recall calls from you re Patriot systems.

I never thought Biden would buck DoD on this, which is why I was for giving them to NATO allies to backfill for their S-300's & other Soviet legacy air defense systems. They're not provocative. They're defensive only. They can't strike into Russia like cruise missiles or our drones could. The drones are the technology we don't want compromised. The Patriots are mobile & far enough behind front lines that the odds of them being captured are minimal.

So, you didn't call for Patriots to Ukraine.
But thought sending to other NATO countries was fine...'cause it's ok if Ukraine falls, just not NATO countries...
I saw it as a way to backfill NATO allies, so they'd give up their Soviet legacy systems that Ukraine could use immediately.
Because of DoD's objections, Patriots were never under serious discussion, except for pleas for them from Ukraine & Poland + some Baltic state(s) on behalf of Ukraine. I did not address it because I did not think it was ever within the realm of possibility. I would have been for it if it was ever raised as a possibility. I was surprised that Biden relented. I suspect the damage done by Russia's recent missile barrages has prompted Biden to reconsider & override DoD. Things must be looking grim for Ukraine as a result of the missile & drone attacks on the infrastructure. Like the Predator/Reaper drones & manned aircraft like F-16's, I figured Patriots were off limits. But, if asked, I would differentiate them from those other offensive weapons. I'm enthusiastic now because I think they can be a game changer (& prompt Putin to negotiate) if they can be deployed quickly enough to make a difference.

Yup, I'm in the camp of providing Ukraine with the weaponry we would use to take back Ukraine's territory. Yes, they will have losses...they have a lot now. But winning this faster is better than slower.
It might not matter if we can't stop the missile/drone attacks. That's why all the pleas have switched to air defense systems, rather than for what's needed to mount a counteroffensive. We (Ukraine & US/NATO) are on our back foot right now.

Appeasement is not the answer, especially with these rationales of "it's really Russia anyway"...
It's not appeasement if you can't prevail on the battlefield or if the cost of continuing is prohibitive.

First of all, it sure looks like Ukraine is prevailing on the battlefield. They have multiple offensives underway, Russian morale is horrendous...that said, there's going to be some back and forth, mostly stalemate until after winter...unless there's a surprise.

I realize that you want, and have wanted from inception, for Russia to regain its 'lost vassals' as the preferred option to war.

My point is that you were silent about Patriots, its hypocritical to condemn Biden, or DoD for that matter, when you wanted Ukraine to simply surrender land in exchange for 'peace', a possibility that's never even been remotely on the table from Putin. The only peace he's offered is elimination of Ukraine as a sovereign nation.

Only Surrender is good enough for old salt.

[MDlaxfan76]

I'm giving Biden credit for FINALLY doing this . ...it's just 6 mos too late. I want the war ended asap & this will help/

Exactly what I've been saying: you want Biden to be PERFECT. In your world, he and his advisors aren't allowed to think, or consider options and the consequences of their actions. He has to shoot first, think later, and if he doesn't, you're all over him.

How many times have you mocked me, saying "the perfect is the enemy of the good".

Funny how you failed to mention that 48 hours ago.

So I cheered the decision without specifically mentioning Biden.
If I had, I would have had to include -- " better late than never ".

When Ukraine expels Russia from its territories, maybe you'll decide to be on the winning side and we can say, "well, better late than never"...

[old salt]

Could you share with us any posts 6 months or longer ago when you were saying we should send them Patriots asap?

I don't recall them, but I'm getting old and foggy at times.

My recollection is more that you were in the camp of not sending more of our highest tech military capabilities, that such would be 'provocative' etc, etc I realize that you may have been talking more about offensive weaponry (I was arguing that such was needed to actually beat back Russia and ultimately force them out) but I don't recall calls from you re Patriot systems.

I never thought Biden would buck DoD on this, which is why I was for giving them to NATO allies to backfill for their S-300's & other Soviet legacy air defense systems. They're not provocative. They're defensive only. They can't strike into Russia like cruise missiles or our drones could. The drones are the technology we don't want compromised. The Patriots are mobile & far enough behind front lines that the odds of them being captured are minimal.

So, you didn't call for Patriots to Ukraine.
But thought sending to other NATO countries was fine...'cause it's ok if Ukraine falls, just not NATO countries...
I saw it as a way to backfill NATO allies, so they'd give up their Soviet legacy systems that Ukraine could use immediately.
Because of DoD's objections, Patriots were never under serious discussion, except for pleas for them from Ukraine & Poland + some Baltic state(s) on behalf of Ukraine. I did not address it because I did not think it was ever within the realm of possibility. I would have been for it if it was ever raised as a possibility. I was surprised that Biden relented. I suspect the damage done by Russia's recent missile barrages has prompted Biden to reconsider & override DoD. Things must be looking grim for Ukraine as a result of the missile & drone attacks on the infrastructure. Like the Predator/Reaper drones & manned aircraft like F-16's, I figured Patriots were off limits. But, if asked, I would differentiate them from those other offensive weapons. I'm enthusiastic now because I think they can be a game changer (& prompt Putin to negotiate) if they can be deployed quickly enough to make a difference.

Yup, I'm in the camp of providing Ukraine with the weaponry we would use to take back Ukraine's territory. Yes, they will have losses...they have a lot now. But winning this faster is better than slower.
It might not matter if we can't stop the missile/drone attacks. That's why all the pleas have switched to air defense systems, rather than for what's needed to mount a counteroffensive. We (Ukraine & US/NATO) are on our back foot right now.

Appeasement is not the answer, especially with these rationales of "it's really Russia anyway"...
It's not appeasement if you can't prevail on the battlefield or if the cost of continuing is prohibitive.

First of all, it sure looks like Ukraine is prevailing on the battlefield. They have multiple offensives underway, Russian morale is horrendous...that said, there's going to be some back and forth, mostly stalemate until after winter...unless there's a surprise.

I realize that you want, and have wanted from inception, for Russia to regain its 'lost vassals' as the preferred option to war.

My point is that you were silent about Patriots, its hypocritical to condemn Biden, or DoD for that matter, when you wanted Ukraine to simply surrender land in exchange for 'peace', a possibility that's never even been remotely on the table from Putin. The only peace he's offered is elimination of Ukraine as a sovereign nation.

That's just wrong. I've always been for giving Ukraine as much DEFENSIVE weaponry as they could operate, without danger of it being captured & compromised.

I repeat. I want an outcome that assures Ukraine's survival, with stable, defensible borders & access to the Black Sea.
I respect Russia's claim to Crimea, & the need for autonomy in the Donbas.
We didn't care about Crimea for 8 years. Now we're fighting a proxy war for it.
Patriots did not come up as a realistic possibility. There may emerge other options that have not been considered of which I will approve.
I wanted this issue settled peacefully, via the Minsk process, but Ukraine refused to participate.

[PizzaSnake]

Could you share with us any posts 6 months or longer ago when you were saying we should send them Patriots asap?

I don't recall them, but I'm getting old and foggy at times.

My recollection is more that you were in the camp of not sending more of our highest tech military capabilities, that such would be 'provocative' etc, etc I realize that you may have been talking more about offensive weaponry (I was arguing that such was needed to actually beat back Russia and ultimately force them out) but I don't recall calls from you re Patriot systems.

I never thought Biden would buck DoD on this, which is why I was for giving them to NATO allies to backfill for their S-300's & other Soviet legacy air defense systems. They're not provocative. They're defensive only. They can't strike into Russia like cruise missiles or our drones could. The drones are the technology we don't want compromised. The Patriots are mobile & far enough behind front lines that the odds of them being captured are minimal.

So, you didn't call for Patriots to Ukraine.
But thought sending to other NATO countries was fine...'cause it's ok if Ukraine falls, just not NATO countries...
I saw it as a way to backfill NATO allies, so they'd give up their Soviet legacy systems that Ukraine could use immediately.
Because of DoD's objections, Patriots were never under serious discussion, except for pleas for them from Ukraine & Poland + some Baltic state(s) on behalf of Ukraine. I did not address it because I did not think it was ever within the realm of possibility. I would have been for it if it was ever raised as a possibility. I was surprised that Biden relented. I suspect the damage done by Russia's recent missile barrages has prompted Biden to reconsider & override DoD. Things must be looking grim for Ukraine as a result of the missile & drone attacks on the infrastructure. Like the Predator/Reaper drones & manned aircraft like F-16's, I figured Patriots were off limits. But, if asked, I would differentiate them from those other offensive weapons. I'm enthusiastic now because I think they can be a game changer (& prompt Putin to negotiate) if they can be deployed quickly enough to make a difference.

Yup, I'm in the camp of providing Ukraine with the weaponry we would use to take back Ukraine's territory. Yes, they will have losses...they have a lot now. But winning this faster is better than slower.
It might not matter if we can't stop the missile/drone attacks. That's why all the pleas have switched to air defense systems, rather than for what's needed to mount a counteroffensive. We (Ukraine & US/NATO) are on our back foot right now.

Appeasement is not the answer, especially with these rationales of "it's really Russia anyway"...
It's not appeasement if you can't prevail on the battlefield or if the cost of continuing is prohibitive.

First of all, it sure looks like Ukraine is prevailing on the battlefield. They have multiple offensives underway, Russian morale is horrendous...that said, there's going to be some back and forth, mostly stalemate until after winter...unless there's a surprise.

I realize that you want, and have wanted from inception, for Russia to regain its 'lost vassals' as the preferred option to war.

My point is that you were silent about Patriots, its hypocritical to condemn Biden, or DoD for that matter, when you wanted Ukraine to simply surrender land in exchange for 'peace', a possibility that's never even been remotely on the table from Putin. The only peace he's offered is elimination of Ukraine as a sovereign nation.

That's just wrong. I've always been for giving Ukraine as much DEFENSIVE weaponry as they could operate, without danger of it being captured & compromised.

I repeat. I want an outcome that assures Ukraine's survival, with stable, defensible borders & access to the Black Sea.
I respect Russia's claim to Crimea, & the need for autonomy in the Donbas.
We didn't care about Crimea for 8 years. Now we're fighting a proxy war for it.
Patriots did not come up as a realistic possibility. There may emerge other options that have not been considered of which I will approve.
I wanted this issue settled peacefully, via the Minsk process, but Ukraine refused to participate.

Um, Budapest Memorandum?

"Fool me once, shame on you
Fool me twice, shame on me."

[old salt]

Could you share with us any posts 6 months or longer ago when you were saying we should send them Patriots asap?

I don't recall them, but I'm getting old and foggy at times.

My recollection is more that you were in the camp of not sending more of our highest tech military capabilities, that such would be 'provocative' etc, etc I realize that you may have been talking more about offensive weaponry (I was arguing that such was needed to actually beat back Russia and ultimately force them out) but I don't recall calls from you re Patriot systems.

I never thought Biden would buck DoD on this, which is why I was for giving them to NATO allies to backfill for their S-300's & other Soviet legacy air defense systems. They're not provocative. They're defensive only. They can't strike into Russia like cruise missiles or our drones could. The drones are the technology we don't want compromised. The Patriots are mobile & far enough behind front lines that the odds of them being captured are minimal.

So, you didn't call for Patriots to Ukraine.
But thought sending to other NATO countries was fine...'cause it's ok if Ukraine falls, just not NATO countries...
I saw it as a way to backfill NATO allies, so they'd give up their Soviet legacy systems that Ukraine could use immediately.
Because of DoD's objections, Patriots were never under serious discussion, except for pleas for them from Ukraine & Poland + some Baltic state(s) on behalf of Ukraine. I did not address it because I did not think it was ever within the realm of possibility. I would have been for it if it was ever raised as a possibility. I was surprised that Biden relented. I suspect the damage done by Russia's recent missile barrages has prompted Biden to reconsider & override DoD. Things must be looking grim for Ukraine as a result of the missile & drone attacks on the infrastructure. Like the Predator/Reaper drones & manned aircraft like F-16's, I figured Patriots were off limits. But, if asked, I would differentiate them from those other offensive weapons. I'm enthusiastic now because I think they can be a game changer (& prompt Putin to negotiate) if they can be deployed quickly enough to make a difference.

Yup, I'm in the camp of providing Ukraine with the weaponry we would use to take back Ukraine's territory. Yes, they will have losses...they have a lot now. But winning this faster is better than slower.
It might not matter if we can't stop the missile/drone attacks. That's why all the pleas have switched to air defense systems, rather than for what's needed to mount a counteroffensive. We (Ukraine & US/NATO) are on our back foot right now.

Appeasement is not the answer, especially with these rationales of "it's really Russia anyway"...
It's not appeasement if you can't prevail on the battlefield or if the cost of continuing is prohibitive.

First of all, it sure looks like Ukraine is prevailing on the battlefield. They have multiple offensives underway, Russian morale is horrendous...that said, there's going to be some back and forth, mostly stalemate until after winter...unless there's a surprise.

I realize that you want, and have wanted from inception, for Russia to regain its 'lost vassals' as the preferred option to war.

My point is that you were silent about Patriots, its hypocritical to condemn Biden, or DoD for that matter, when you wanted Ukraine to simply surrender land in exchange for 'peace', a possibility that's never even been remotely on the table from Putin. The only peace he's offered is elimination of Ukraine as a sovereign nation.

That's just wrong. I've always been for giving Ukraine as much DEFENSIVE weaponry as they could operate, without danger of it being captured & compromised.

I repeat. I want an outcome that assures Ukraine's survival, with stable, defensible borders & access to the Black Sea.
I respect Russia's claim to Crimea, & the need for autonomy in the Donbas.
We didn't care about Crimea for 8 years. Now we're fighting a proxy war for it.
Patriots did not come up as a realistic possibility. There may emerge other options that have not been considered of which I will approve.
I wanted this issue settled peacefully, via the Minsk process, but Ukraine refused to participate.

Um, Budapest Memorandum?

"Fool me once, shame on you
Fool me twice, shame on me."

Had they participated in the Minsk process, the Budapest Memo would never have come into play.

Why did NATO & the US not respond in 2014, when Crimea was seized & the Donbas enclaves separated, if the Budapest Memo was binding ?
Ukraine did not even defend the Crimea.

[Kismet]

I'm giving Biden credit for FINALLY doing this . ...it's just 6 mos too late. I want the war ended asap & this will help/

Exactly what I've been saying: you want Biden to be PERFECT. In your world, he and his advisors aren't allowed to think, or consider options and the consequences of their actions. He has to shoot first, think later, and if he doesn't, you're all over him.

How many times have you mocked me, saying "the perfect is the enemy of the good".

Funny how you failed to mention that 48 hours ago.

So I cheered the decision without specifically mentioning Biden.
If I had, I would have had to include -- " better late than never ".

But you didn't.
Weak sauce, sailor.

[old salt]

“Fear of NATO” is pure Putin balderdash. As everybody knows, Ukraine is not a member of NATO. Also, NATO is a defensive treaty. NATO hasn’t invaded anybody ever. Nobody was going to invade Russia, although it might happen now due to what will go down in history as Putin‘s folly.

The Serbs & Afghans would disagree.

Serbia is a complex situation to be sure, but NATO got involved there to try to stop ethnic cleansing and war crimes among other things. I think history will judge that it was the right thing to do. I don't think anyone at NATO or elsewhere was suggesting NATO should invade Russia to stop whatever Putin was doing to the Russian people.

An attack on our country was launched from Afghanistan. The party in power (the Taliban) was harboring the terrorists. Did we stay too long? Yes, in my view, but I don't see Putin's "fear" of a NATO invasion (at least prior to his latest invasion of Ukraine) being comparable to what we (and NATO) did at least at the outset in Afghanistan. In one instance our biggest city was in effect bombed from fighters in Afghanistan. Putting Crimea aside, what attacks had Russia launched that could reasonably have precipitated an attack on Russia? Should he fear one now? Possibly, but he is 100% responsible for that. As bad as the invasion of Crimea was, I don't think NATO seriously considered invading Russia. And Putin knew that. The comparative lack of the world's response to Crimea is (I believe) something that emboldened him to attack Ukraine proper.

But let's call a spade a spade here. Putin doesn't "fear" a NATO invasion (at least before he launched his latest war against Ukraine). He invaded to try to reconstitute the old Soviet Union. And he had no intention of stopping in Ukraine. He'd have gone after the Baltic states and (I believe) maybe Poland or further if he could. Maybe not now as his supposedly vaunted army has been shown to be a house of cards.

But let's get back to whether Putin had a reasonable fear of an invasion from NATO. Are you saying he did? To what do you point to support that? I just don't think there was any possibility at all that NATO would invade Russia. And possibly start WWIII? I just don't see it.

Does he not like missiles pointed at him? I'm sure he doesn't, just like the Ukrainians, the Poles, the Germans, and the French don't like missiles pointed at them. Pointing missiles isn't the same as firing them or invading a neighboring country though.

I've said this before: an entirely different leader of Russia could have worked to foster trade with Ukraine and Europe. Rich markets are available on both sides. Russia could have made Ukraine a friendly (at least friendly-ish) neighbor and been able to maintain its decades long right to Sebastopol (well into the 2040s) which is now at risk.

NATO & EU nations fomented "color" revolutions & regime changes in Georgia & Ukraine (twice). That's why Putin opposes NATO expansion to his borders. He fears western inspired revolutions in Belarus & Russia next. ...not without cause.

[old salt]

I'm giving Biden credit for FINALLY doing this . ...it's just 6 mos too late. I want the war ended asap & this will help/

Exactly what I've been saying: you want Biden to be PERFECT. In your world, he and his advisors aren't allowed to think, or consider options and the consequences of their actions. He has to shoot first, think later, and if he doesn't, you're all over him.

How many times have you mocked me, saying "the perfect is the enemy of the good".

Funny how you failed to mention that 48 hours ago.

So I cheered the decision without specifically mentioning Biden.
If I had, I would have had to include -- " better late than never ".

But you didn't.
Weak sauce, sailor.

I was trying to keep politics out of it, but you trolls had to make it political.

[old salt]

I'm giving Biden credit for FINALLY doing this . ...it's just 6 mos too late. I want the war ended asap & this will help/

Exactly what I've been saying: you want Biden to be PERFECT. In your world, he and his advisors aren't allowed to think, or consider options and the consequences of their actions. He has to shoot first, think later, and if he doesn't, you're all over him.

How many times have you mocked me, saying "the perfect is the enemy of the good".

Funny how you failed to mention that 48 hours ago.

So I cheered the decision without specifically mentioning Biden.
If I had, I would have had to include -- " better late than never ".

When Ukraine expels Russia from its territories, maybe you'll decide to be on the winning side and we can say, "well, better late than never"...

I hope so. I hope Gen Milley is wrong.

obtw -- I don't recall you calling specifically for Patriots either. You wanted offensive weapons like UAV's & ATACMS.

[old salt]

Apparently MacGregor is not the only one who expects a Russian winter offensive.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/12/1 ... e-00074153

U.S. eyes new weapons for Ukraine as Kyiv fears new Russian offensive
Patriot missiles, bomb kits and more training are on the table as Moscow looks to take more ground.

Kyiv’s pleas for help are increasing in urgency as its battlefield gains stall and Moscow continues its bombardment of Ukrainian cities. Russia has destroyed half of Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, the United Nations reports, with regular blackouts and power cuts leaving millions without electricity just as winter sets in.

[njbill]

NATO & EU nations fomented "color" revolutions & regime changes in Georgia & Ukraine (twice). That's why Putin opposes NATO expansion to his borders. He fears western inspired revolutions in Belarus & Russia next. ...not without cause.

I don't think NATO expansion would impact Western attempts at inspiring revolution or regime change in Belarus or Russia. Any such efforts could occur whether or not Ukraine joins NATO.

Inspiring revolutions, interfering with elections? Russia has interfered with our elections and we haven't invaded Russia. Russia has fomented regime change in Ukraine. That the West may try to inspire revolutions in Russia, well, that's just life on Planet Earth. Everybody does it. Nobody but Russia invades their neighbor.

But most fundamentally, how would Putin's invading Ukraine prevent the West from inspiring revolution in Russia? If anything, I would think it would have the opposite effect.

[a fan]

=NATO & EU nations fomented "color" revolutions & regime changes in Georgia & Ukraine (twice). That's why Putin opposes NATO expansion to his borders.

Again with this stuff---this is just idiotic, moronic reasoning, and lays bare how bankrupt these excuses are for Putin.

If Putin annexes Ukraine????

That puts MORE NATO countries along his border, not fewer. What the heck are you talking about?

Do I need to show you a map of the region, OS?

Jeezus. This is what happens when you give policy wonks too much money, and no pushback for their papers.