Quote (Goomshill @ 12 May 2022 18:47)

What does it really mean to 'embolden' Russia in this context?
Take the hypothetical. A bully keeps backing a kid into a corner in a playground. He pushes up against him, keeps intimidating him, gets him into a spot with no retreat. Eventually he's got nothing to do but hold his ground, he can't fall back any further. When that kid swings a punch back, the bully says that he can't let it stand because otherwise he'd be emboldened to keep pushing back. We spent 30 years expanding NATO across eastern europe and building a military alliance against the shia allies of Russia in the mideast. We took the Czechs, Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Albania, Croatia. Finally we overthrew the government in Ukraine and seized Russia's last buffer state.

That justification of curbing Russia's neo-imperialist desires is premised on our own neo-imperialist desires. Any attempt by Russia to restore the status quo before our hostile intervention is framed as irredentism. And worse yet, its done with an impotent approach. I said early on with this conflict we could either invest the direct NATO military confrontation needed to hold Ukraine and oppose Russia, or we could appease them, but we couldn't do both with some bastardized passive-aggressive approach. Which is exactly what Biden did. In the lead-up to the war he stood down and said we wouldn't stop Russia. Now we're prodding on the conflict just to make it as bitter and bloody as possible, with most of the casualties going to be Ukrainians. And for what? Giving the Russians a bloody nose? To what end? We're not stopping them.

This is the worst of all outcomes. We could have aligned peacefully with Russia to oppose China, seeking to resolve Ukraine diplomatically and thawing our relations. We could have stopped Russia cold and led a NATO intervention to fortify Ukraine and hold Russia at its border. We could have let Russia seize Ukraine and still maintained our hostilities but minimized the humanitarian costs and not be wasting millions of dollars of treasure, and some blood, trying to fight them in a half-assed manner. Instead Russia is emboldened, Biden is weak, our economy is hurting worse than Russia's, our allies are put in a geopolitical vice grip while the unaligned nations are aligning against us. The only way this thread leads to lasting peace is a peace achieved where America crumbles and our enemies are victorious.

Quote (Black XistenZ @ May 12 2022 11:24am)

That's the million dollar question, isn't it: would the alternative be better for the national interests of the US?

If the US and the EU hadn't armed Ukraine and just dropped them right when the fighting begun, no intelligence and recon support and so on, then Russia would have won rather easily. Hence, dropping Ukraine would embolden Russia, embolden China with regard to Taiwan and the South China Sea, tarnish the US reputation as a dependable ally, take away Ukraine as a customer market and workbench for the European economy, give Putin more leverage over the food supplies for large swaths of Africa and the Middle East and create a "successful" blueprint for Russia to tackle the Baltics next via bogus claims of an oppressed Russian minority that needs to be "liberated".

If we had allowed Putin to take Ukraine without much fight, would he have proverbially gone home and enjoyed his victory, or would he have interpreted this as a confirmation for his preconception that the West is weak, decadent and lacks resolve? Putin's statements throughout the years are completely unambiguous, he literally said that he wants to recapture - at a minimum - all of the territory of the former Soviet Union. Imho, it's pretty clear that a Russian "success" in Ukraine would not have led to lasting peace, it would have prompted Putin to test the Western commitment to the Baltics next. Imho, it makes far more sense to stop Russia's neo-imperialist desires right here right now, where Article V is not directly concerned like it would be in the Baltics. If you ask me, handing the Russians a bloody nose in Ukraine, exposing their military as the paper tiger that it is and stunting Russia's ability to replenish the equipment losses will do far more to create lasting peace than rolling over and giving the aggressor what he wants.

Quote (Ironfister @ 12 May 2022 13:20)

USA are accepting 100k UA refugees this year. Not the very big amount, but still something.
UA people dont really love travel that far away across the ocean, they hope the war ends soon and come back, so usually would prefer to stay somewhere closer: Germany, Poland, Romania, Hungary.
USA helps a lot in other ways, including military and intelligence support.
Also USA helps Europe with resource supplies. USA is doing their job just fine imo. Im glad its not Trump in the office, as he would do worse definitely.
Of course you can always ask for more help, but lets be realistic: every politician needs to please their own voters.

Quote (Black XistenZ @ May 12 2022 12:24pm)

That's the million dollar question, isn't it: would the alternative be better for the national interests of the US?

If the US and the EU hadn't armed Ukraine and just dropped them right when the fighting begun, no intelligence and recon support and so on, then Russia would have won rather easily. Hence, dropping Ukraine would embolden Russia, embolden China with regard to Taiwan and the South China Sea, tarnish the US reputation as a dependable ally, take away Ukraine as a customer market and workbench for the European economy, give Putin more leverage over the food supplies for large swaths of Africa and the Middle East and create a "successful" blueprint for Russia to tackle the Baltics next via bogus claims of an oppressed Russian minority that needs to be "liberated".

If we had allowed Putin to take Ukraine without much fight, would he have proverbially gone home and enjoyed his victory, or would he have interpreted this as a confirmation for his preconception that the West is weak, decadent and lacks resolve? Putin's statements throughout the years are completely unambiguous, he literally said that he wants to recapture - at a minimum - all of the territory of the former Soviet Union. Imho, it's pretty clear that a Russian "success" in Ukraine would not have led to lasting peace, it would have prompted Putin to test the Western commitment to the Baltics next. Imho, it makes far more sense to stop Russia's neo-imperialist desires right here right now, where Article V is not directly concerned like it would be in the Baltics. If you ask me, handing the Russians a bloody nose in Ukraine, exposing their military as the paper tiger that it is and stunting Russia's ability to replenish the equipment losses will do far more to create lasting peace than rolling over and giving the aggressor what he wants.

Quote (SanduLungu @ 12 May 2022 10:36)

https://edition.cnn.com/videos/world/2022/05/11/surveillance-video-russian-forces-sidner-pkg-lead-vpx.cnn/video/playlists/russia-ukraine-military-conflict/

russian soldiers shoot two civilians in the back, murdering them

Quote (Goomshill @ 12 May 2022 11:04)

also we're pissing away more money to bloody Russian noses in Ukraine than we did on the Afghanistan war each year and nearly as much as Iraq. And at the worst possible time for our economy.
And its not being spent on our troops. We don't even have to wonder if the weapons we're shipping overseas will wind up in the hands of bad guys when we're sending them directly to literal nazis, like a reverse lend-lease.

half the restaurants I frequented have gone out of business and the others have prices 30-50% higher than the old take-out menus I still have. And we're spending $54 billion on scorched earth tactics in the world's break basket

Quote (Djunior @ May 12 2022 01:16pm)

There's so much wrong with this post.

1) Russia is acting because of EU / NATO expansion. Nothing else. You guys caused this yourself and your post makes it clear why. See 2)

2) So you're saying Ukraine is Europe's workbench? You mean source of cheap labor for your factories? Wasn't Poland the source of cheap labor before, and after that Hungary / Romania / Bulgaria? And now you need more once again? What country are you gonna annex / conquer after you've depleted Ukraine's workforce?

3) Why on Earth would Russia be interested in the Baltics. They're already NATO members. Why would Putin want war against NATO. You sound like woke MSM at this point.

Quote (ferdia @ May 12 2022 02:35pm)

I would argue that he took it from a point in time, i.e. Jan 2022, therefore I don't see much wrong with the post. your response relates to events that occurred over the last 2 decades which directly led to this conflict. I dont think he said Ukraine was europe's workbench, but rather that Ukraine did in fact have assets (as most large countries do).

I agree with you that the baltic's comments are a red herring, i.e. unfounded and misguided, noting Putin is not empire building but rather attempting to maintain the status quo.

Quote (Djunior @ 12 May 2022 20:49)

It's well know that the countries I mentioned above provided much of EU's cheap labor. At some point it got so bad that too many Poles had left Poland and the country needed labor from Ukraine because they didn't have enough workers left.

In my opinion EU is eying Ukraine for exactly that reason --> another bag of cheap labor to put to work in German factories and meatworks.