can i be cheeky and suggest that the US is using soft power to steer / direct the war ? is such a statement palatable ?

also

"The Biden administration has decided against sending tanks to Ukraine for now, which comes after weeks of buzz around the topic."

also

"WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. will send 90 Stryker combat vehicles and an additional 59 Bradley fighting vehicles to Ukraine, in addition to hundreds of thousands of rounds of ammunition, the Pentagon announced on Thursday. It is the latest aid package timed to help Ukraine push back against Russia's entrenched forward lines.

The package, valued at $2.5 billion, does not include tanks, which has become a point of contention as Germany has indicated it will not send its own Leopard tanks to Ukraine unless the U.S. sends the Abrams. The U.S. has said that the Abrams tank, which is propelled by a complex turbine engine similar to an aircraft jet engine, would not be a good fit for the current fight because of its frequent maintenance and fueling needs."

===

no tanks and no long range weapons from the US. can anyone please tell me what the US strategy here is, because this is not going to help ukraine win.

This post was edited by ferdia on Jan 20 2023 02:42pm

Western leaders will have a lot of explanation to do. This is no longer Ukraine's war, the West is keeping Ukraine in the war no doubt about it. When Ukraine loses everything will be lost.

Country in ruins, possibly a generation young man wiped out, promised EU and NATO membership down the drain. You really think no Western leaders / governments will be held accountable for this level of a fail? They will have a lot of explaining to do at the very least

explain to who ?

It's not, as German polls have clearly showed that Germans are not in favor of sending tanks. This is what Democracy and following the will of your people looks like.

If you want more done go lobby your own government which has done a tiny fraction of what Germany has done when it comes to actually helping Ukrainians.

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Jan 20 2023 02:44pm

Obviously to the people that have the right to vote for them or not...

e: That's the heads on the chopping block, I though it was clear

This post was edited by Djunior on Jan 20 2023 02:42pm

but why? this is not a war from X country. its a Ukraine / Russia war. therefore why would a PM in the UK, Germany, or the US be on the chopping block?

Make the war grind on long enough that Russia collapses, at least that is the most rational argument I've seen on the pro western side for this conflict

If NATO and the US were serious about defending Ukraine they would have admitted Ukraine to NATO instead of leaving it a "partner" with a huge target on its back. At the end of the day they will not give Ukraine anything that can seriously threaten Russia because not a single one of those countries wants to risk nuclear war for Ukraine, regardless of their rhetoric.

I think it's a good one:

Germany hasn’t made a decision to allow the sending of Leopard battle tanks to Ukraine, but will allow other countries to train Ukrainian soldiers on the vehicles.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/germany-allows-ukraine-preparatory-training-160539831.html

For policies that cost the EU trillions (everything combined like inflation / energy / aid / etc etc) and resulted in Ukraine being ruined.

(EU example cuz EU will be the biggest loser if Russia wins)

This post was edited by Djunior on Jan 20 2023 03:16pm

We aren't stupid. We don't want a slowly developing WW3. The notion of German tanks on Russia's border against Russians is well.. And why does the US expect us to do their bidding? They can send their Abrams first for all I care. The possibility of a retaliation is very real short or long term.

This post was edited by babun1024 on Jan 20 2023 03:41pm