1 hour ago, Hanaguma said:

Yes because I don't think there IS risk of escalation, at least in the conventional military sense. The Russian military has proved largely incompetent. It is NOT the same as the spectre the Soviet Red Army posed inthe 60s and 70s. They do not have the capability to invade western Europe or threaten NATO. 

 

And let's speculate that, with the help of the west, Ukraine is able to beat the Russians back to the pre-war borders- again, including Crimea?  Now what.....

 

You cannot seriously think Putin will just put his tail between his legs and slink off.  

 

The biggest threat of escalation IMHO is in nuclear weapons. Russia has them, lots of them.  The treat is a catastrophic defeat of the Russian Army could trigger a nuclear response.  This is what I worry about the most. 

“You cannot seriously think Putin will just put his tail between his legs and slink off.”

 

Defeat will have political consequences for Putin.

 

But to flip your question.

 

Do you seriously think Putin will cease his illegal invasions if he’s not stopped this time?

3 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

So you would not support direct military intervention by NATO if Putin were to prevail and actually take over vast areas of Ukraine?  Because THAT is the blood I am talking about. If you are willing to send NATO to war with Russia to reclaim a conquered Ukraine, just say so. 

 

 

And there is the argument for arming and assisting Ukraine.

 

Fight Russia in Ukraine.

 

And let the Russians take care of Putin.

10 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

And there is the argument for arming and assisting Ukraine.

 

Fight Russia in Ukraine.

 

And let the Russians take care of Putin.

Chomp, those are good questions. I will try and answer your two messages here, if that is OK...

 

First, regarding Putin's ambitions. They are limited by his military capacity. The Russian Army cannot carry out offensive operations anywhere too far from the Russian border. They do not have airlift or logistics capability to operate at a distance.  So no I am not worried about him invading another country. Where do you think he will target next?  I can't think of anywhere.

 

Again, "let's arm Ukraine" sounds lovely but it is actually very simplistic. We need to decide what the endgame is, and what is acceptable as a compromise solution that does not set off a larger conflict.  

 

"Let the Russians take care of Putin" again sounds good. But... who comes next?  I cannot see a Russian version of Barack Obama on the horizon. Chances are the next guy will be even worse, with fewer scruples and more aggression. Better to deal with the devil we know than the one we don't. 

 

And to answer my own question about NATO intervention, I would say no. No under any circumstances in Ukraine. IF Putin attacks a NATO member then all bets are off.  How about you?

Myth 3: ‘Russia wouldn’t attack a NATO member state’ 

There are several reasons why it is incorrect to assume that Russia would not attack NATO members.

https://www.chathamhouse.org/2022/06/myths-and-misconceptions-around-russian-military-intent/myth-3-russia-wouldnt-attack-nato

 

 

7 hours ago, Bkk Brian said:

Russia's military budget in 2022 was $75 billion. Its 2023 budget is $84 billion.

 

Ukraine has received around $27 billion in military aid so far. The rest was humanitarian

As usual @hanaguma just posts rubbish without any links or research. I suppose that it makes him feel important.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foreign_aid_to_Ukraine_during_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War#:~:text=The Kiel Institute has tracked,January to 3 October 2022.

 

https://www.cfr.org/article/how-much-aid-has-us-sent-ukraine-here-are-six-charts

 

https://www.statista.com/chart/27278/military-aid-to-ukraine-by-country/

 

https://www.devex.com/news/funding-tracker-who-s-sending-aid-to-ukraine-102887

 

That took me all of 5 minutes on Google search.

 

Google works faster than me.

 

About 233,000,000 results (0.41 seconds) 

5 hours ago, placeholder said:

Before it was money, now it's gold? Maybe next it will be bitcoins?

Please don't feed the troll. Just ignore him.

I can't wait until we stop seeing this horrible grasping clown on the front news pages every day.

The little man in a green shirt is on a ride he can't get off. Start talking peace and the oligarchs and arms dealers making billions from this war will line him up against a wall.

 

At least if there was independent media in Ukraine they could give him cover. But he banned them months ago. Man's in a hole he dug himself. Happens all the time to TV comics who become president.

3 minutes ago, Chigur said:

Happens all the time to TV comics who become president.

Now now Anton, play nice.....

1 hour ago, Hanaguma said:

Chomp, those are good questions. I will try and answer your two messages here, if that is OK...

 

First, regarding Putin's ambitions. They are limited by his military capacity. The Russian Army cannot carry out offensive operations anywhere too far from the Russian border. They do not have airlift or logistics capability to operate at a distance.  So no I am not worried about him invading another country. Where do you think he will target next?  I can't think of anywhere.

 

Again, "let's arm Ukraine" sounds lovely but it is actually very simplistic. We need to decide what the endgame is, and what is acceptable as a compromise solution that does not set off a larger conflict.  

 

"Let the Russians take care of Putin" again sounds good. But... who comes next?  I cannot see a Russian version of Barack Obama on the horizon. Chances are the next guy will be even worse, with fewer scruples and more aggression. Better to deal with the devil we know than the one we don't. 

 

And to answer my own question about NATO intervention, I would say no. No under any circumstances in Ukraine. IF Putin attacks a NATO member then all bets are off.  How about you?

You mention the endgame. The US's problem is that it never thinks through the exit strategy and endgame. The sort of question like "what does success look like?" is never asked or answered by the Pentagon. All of which means we have had such a series of huge successes following America's lead into wars......look at after 20 years of war, the Taliban on Tuesday banned all education for girls.....Libya a total disaster, the richest African state 20 years ago now a disaster; Syria, the US are actually stealing (it is totally illegal) Syrian oil; Iraq still an unstable success where going to the market may get you killed after 30 years of American war. I could go on and talk about the so called so called successes like Kosovo....once touted as a success and which is now slaughtering ethnic Serbs, provoking a reaction from Serbia....not a single one of these wars had an endgame. How can you win wars when you don't know what your objectives are?

16 minutes ago, Pedrogaz said:

How can you win wars when you don't know what your objectives are?

Big thick stacks of cash and all the nice <deleted> that kind of chiss buys.

Wake Up.

48 minutes ago, Chigur said:

The little man in a green shirt is on a ride he can't get off. Start talking peace and the oligarchs and arms dealers making billions from this war will line him up against a wall.

 

At least if there was independent media in Ukraine they could give him cover. But he banned them months ago. Man's in a hole he dug himself. Happens all the time to TV comics who become president.

Sounds like Kremlin propaganda. 

53 minutes ago, Chigur said:

The little man in a green shirt is on a ride he can't get off. Start talking peace and the oligarchs and arms dealers making billions from this war will line him up against a wall.

 

At least if there was independent media in Ukraine they could give him cover. But he banned them months ago. Man's in a hole he dug himself. Happens all the time to TV comics who become president.

Welcome to the forum newbie, you missed the part when Russia invaded Ukraine illegally

 

 

57 minutes ago, Chigur said:

The little man in a green shirt is on a ride he can't get off. Start talking peace and the oligarchs and arms dealers making billions from this war will line him up against a wall.

 

At least if there was independent media in Ukraine they could give him cover. But he banned them months ago. Man's in a hole he dug himself. Happens all the time to TV comics who become president.

"Start talking peace....."

Start peace talks? With an attacker that wants to take over your country and is killing your citizens in the tens of thousands?

 

"Man's in a hole he dug himself."

Yes, by letting Ukraine be attacked by Russia. Right, OK then.

 

Is anyone else wondering about these Ukraine/Zelensky bashing poster? You know, nationality, motivation, sanity etc?

https://twitter.com/DarthPutinKGB/status/1605887617316298752

 

1 hour ago, billd766 said:

As usual @hanaguma just posts rubbish without any links or research. I suppose that it makes him feel important.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foreign_aid_to_Ukraine_during_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War#:~:text=The Kiel Institute has tracked,January to 3 October 2022.

 

https://www.cfr.org/article/how-much-aid-has-us-sent-ukraine-here-are-six-charts

 

https://www.statista.com/chart/27278/military-aid-to-ukraine-by-country/

 

https://www.devex.com/news/funding-tracker-who-s-sending-aid-to-ukraine-102887

 

That took me all of 5 minutes on Google search.

 

Google works faster than me.

 

About 233,000,000 results (0.41 seconds) 

Perhaps you missed this link i posted earlier, from CSIS:

 

https://www.csis.org/analysis/aid-ukraine-explained-six-charts

 

US military aid alone is $27 billion and climbing. Other countries $10 billion and climbing. More to come. Plus lots of humanitarian aid serves to free up other money that can be used for military purposes.   

 

In any case, perhaps you are right. Comparing aid to the entire Russian defence budget is foolish. After all, how much of Russia's defence budget is actually committed to the Ukraine war? Perhaps half? In that case, aid to Ukraine is equal to the Russian expenditure.  

 

I am still a bit amazed by the vitriol on the part of those who are such unquestioning supporters of Zelensky. It really irritates them if someone dares to disagree. The comparisons I saw to Churchill on the news today were gag inducing.  Zelensky is just another leader of a pseudo democratic country with his hand out. 

1 hour ago, Pedrogaz said:

You mention the endgame. The US's problem is that it never thinks through the exit strategy and endgame. The sort of question like "what does success look like?" is never asked or answered by the Pentagon. All of which means we have had such a series of huge successes following America's lead into wars......look at after 20 years of war, the Taliban on Tuesday banned all education for girls.....Libya a total disaster, the richest African state 20 years ago now a disaster; Syria, the US are actually stealing (it is totally illegal) Syrian oil; Iraq still an unstable success where going to the market may get you killed after 30 years of American war. I could go on and talk about the so called so called successes like Kosovo....once touted as a success and which is now slaughtering ethnic Serbs, provoking a reaction from Serbia....not a single one of these wars had an endgame. How can you win wars when you don't know what your objectives are?

Perhaps because winning isn't the goal. The goal is to fuel the machine.  There are also domestic political considerations for Biden.  Ukraine is a good distraction from the real troubles that exist within the borders of the United States.  Also anything to do with Putin instantly draws a crowd of shrill T D S patients to the party.  

 

Like I have said many times, let's imagine that Ukraine 'wins' the war and drives the Russians back to the original borders. Now what?   Putin/Russia won't just stop fighting. They have sunk costs they need to recoup somehow. 

1 hour ago, Pedrogaz said:

I can't wait until we stop seeing this horrible grasping clown on the front news pages every day.

Thank you for your well reasoned and rational observation.

1 minute ago, Hanaguma said:

Perhaps because winning isn't the goal. The goal is to fuel the machine.  There are also domestic political considerations for Biden.  Ukraine is a good distraction from the real troubles that exist within the borders of the United States.  Also anything to do with Putin instantly draws a crowd of shrill T D S patients to the party.  

 

Like I have said many times, let's imagine that Ukraine 'wins' the war and drives the Russians back to the original borders. Now what?   Putin/Russia won't just stop fighting. They have sunk costs they need to recoup somehow. 

Thank you for your conspiracy theorizing. Always the mark of a serious thinker.

2 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Thank you for your conspiracy theorizing. Always the mark of a serious thinker.

No conspiracy, just realism. Domestic politics almost always impacts foreign policy, especially in the US.

 

Now, do you have any thoughts on a realistic endgame scenario?  Russia just says "oops" and goes home?  

Sad but it looks like this needs explaining to the shills:

 

“Zelensky has continued to wear the green uniform as a commander-in-chief in solidarity with his soldiers who are risking their lives on the frontline. It is not intended to disrespect any audience or institution”

 

The man in the olive green t

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/21/style/volodymyr-zelensky-t-shirt.html

10 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

Some keyboard warriors here have spoken their piece but what does Americans feel about the war.

 

Majority of Americans (57%) believe that US should continue sending military and financial aid to Ukraine. Only a third (33%) say they think US can’t afford to spend more on the conflict. 82% of respondents perceive Russia is an enemy up significantly from last year. and 76% Americans consider Ukraine an ally. 
 

https://www.voanews.com/a/poll-majority-of-americans-support-continued-aid-for-ukraine/6858460.html

The article gives Zero info on:

How many polled;

How those polled were obtained;

What the exact wording of the questions was;

etc.

8 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

Again you are making WW2 comparisons when they are not warranted.  How about answering my basic questions about your support for the war- how much is too much, and would you go to war?

Putin used the excuse for his invasion of a sovereign nation he’s there (to protect the Russian speaking peoples )it is verbatim exactly the same bs excuse hitler used for his invasion of the sudatenland the world will not make the same mistake again you say at what cost well sir whatever it takes to stop this killer Putin from killing Ukrainians and for getting Russians killed in his war of conquest 

4 minutes ago, Chigur said:

Actually, according to some accounts Churchill was a racist <deleted>. Apparently, caused a famine in India which killed millions because he refused to let shipments of grain dock to feed "dirty brown people'.

 

So, our favorite TV comic turned great world leader might in fact be better.

Stalin deliberately caused a famine in Ukraine killing 3.5 to 5 million victims. 

3 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

No conspiracy, just realism. Domestic politics almost always impacts foreign policy, especially in the US.

 

Now, do you have any thoughts on a realistic endgame scenario?  Russia just says "oops" and goes home?  

How about the Russian confederation crumbles? Lots of states in the Russian Federation are very unhappy with the war in Ukraine. In fact all the 'stans. And other members of the confederation where non-ethnic Russians dominate. In fact, China warned Russia not to invade Kazakhstan after Russian nationalists started to make the same kind of ridiculous Nazi claims about the Kazakhstan government that they did about Ukraine's government.

2 minutes ago, placeholder said:

How about the Russian confederation crumbles? Lots of states in the Russian Federation are very unhappy with the war in Ukraine. In fact all the 'stans. And other members of the confederation where non-ethnic Russians dominate. In fact, China warned Russia not to invade Kazakhstan after Russian nationalists started to make the same kind of ridiculous Nazi claims about the Kazakhstan government that they did about Ukraine's government.

...and that would be a Good Thing? Worked great for Yugoslavia, didn't it...

Just now, Hanaguma said:

...and that would be a Good Thing? Worked great for Yugoslavia, didn't it...

Yugoslavia wasn't threatening its neighbors with a toxic ideology. 

5 minutes ago, Tug said:

Putin used the excuse for his invasion of a sovereign nation he’s there (to protect the Russian speaking peoples )it is verbatim exactly the same bs excuse hitler used for his invasion of the sudatenland the world will not make the same mistake again you say at what cost well sir whatever it takes to stop this killer Putin from killing Ukrainians and for getting Russians killed in his war of conquest 

Periods. They aren't just for breakfast.

 

I see you are another member of the "whatever it takes" fanclub.  Except you probably don't really mean it as anything other than a facile virtue signal. Does it mean go to war? Nuke Russia? Bankrupt your country to defend Ukraine? Try to be a bit more specific. 

*Deleted post edited out*

 

The poll was not conducted by VOA.

45 minutes ago, placeholder said:

How about the Russian confederation crumbles? Lots of states in the Russian Federation are very unhappy with the war in Ukraine. In fact all the 'stans. And other members of the confederation where non-ethnic Russians dominate. In fact, China warned Russia not to invade Kazakhstan after Russian nationalists started to make the same kind of ridiculous Nazi claims about the Kazakhstan government that they did about Ukraine's government.

The claim that the Ukrainian Government have a Nazi inspired infiltration are not unfounded .

 

 

Profile: Who are Ukraine’s far-right Azov regiment?

The far-right neo-Nazi group has expanded to become part of Ukraine’s armed forces, a street militia and a political party."

 

A White supremacist neo nazi militia militia

 

 

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/1/who-are-the-azov-regiment