I think that Europe, [u]not[/u] the US, should send paratroopers to Ukraine. France may start by sending 5000 professionally trained légion étrangère guys as a first step, well equipped with the most modern and deadly armament. UK should provide Ukraine with long-range missiles so military targets in Russia can be destroyed. Then let's see how the Russian monsters will react and whatever they will do we'll strike back ten times harder.
@helenS @Ontheroad lets not forget WHY Vlad can rattle nukes. Ukraine once HAD some didnt we make a deal with US, to [i]guarantee there sovereignty [/i] in exchange for handing over those nukes? aaaand in 2014 Russia invaded Ukrainian Crimea,and then president BHO decided not to intervene? anyone Know more Details on this??
This has always been an issue with US/NATO proxy wars. Fighting a war on the enemy's terms means you are always fighting the war in your front yard and hoping that the enemy just stops and goes home.
As brutal as it may sound, they have to also take the war to Russia so the Russian people suffer the consequences of Putin's behavior, so that the Russian military will have to spend more of it's resources defending their homeland and sending less of their resources to Ukraine. As it is now, the Russian people are pretty much continuing life as usual while life in Ukraine is miserable. Until life in Russia is made as miserable as life in Ukraine, the war will go on until either Russia tires or Ukraine collapses.
The only other option is to prolong the war and all the suffering it brings. The only way that Ukraine can win the war and maintain all of its own territory would be to massive upscale it's military capacity. That would cost a lot of money, time and lives. It wouldn't be certain to succeed either. The West has been doing the opposite. If people in the west are serious about prolonging this (as in really serious), then this is the cost
@helenS Sending paratrooper into Ukraine is what you said. That is fair enough
However, it would still start a hot war between the EU and Russia. That is not something to suggest lightly. If it did, you wouldn't want the consequences. It also won't happen because the EU won't be sending troops. Look at the reaction to Macron's comments.
Can I name one war between two democracies in my adult life?
Why? If people elect the government and it launches a military campaign, the same number of people will still die.
Western backed dictatorships have also started plenty of wars. The Saudis in Yemen is an obvious example.
I know you don't want to fall out with me on Israel/Palestine because we have strongly different views but it is relevent. If we are drawing a distinction between the good guys and freedom fighters in the west and violence of tyranny, well the invasion. and bombing of Gaza does not sit well with that narrative.
We can also talk about all the shitty invasions (on both sides) during the cold war era, justified to domestic populations by a narrative if moral superiority. Also, the Iraq war and Afghanistan, which were wars against dictatorships.
Not everyone. I did not think Russia would try to take the whole of Ukraine and I was expecting a limited offensive in the east if the country. I was surprised by that, yes.
However, what the invasion did demonstrate is that Russia is not a superpower like the soviet Union was. Not even close. Also given the huge economic and military cost of this long war, it makes invasion of anyone else less -not more- likely.
First step -- impeach/vote out every Groupie of Putin -- aka the GOP -- and get some sane Representatives in Congress to vote for military aide to Ukraine.
Even if Trump is not elected, if Republicans hold the House or Senate there won’t be further American funding for Ukraine . Europe won’t make up the slack in terms of funding and arms, nor will they commit troops.
Putin’s strategy seems to be paying off as horrible as that is.
NATO could push back the Russians in a month, probably less as I assume Russian troops would just cut and run. I’d risk it all. Full stop. I don’t really want to live in a world where the West lets Putin get away with it. It’s shameful.
@Bumbles One issue affecting NATO participation may be about which countries are economically benefitting from the war.
It's like when we question if US foreign aide finds its way into the pockets of US politicians or the pockets of their friends. With the intentional lack of accountability for aid going to Ukraine, it's understandable that some NATO nations may be reluctant to contribute $$ or people without transparency, much like the reluctance with the American people.
Ukraine was lost the second the world shrugged it's collective shoulders and refused to rush to it's aid.
Paying lip service to the hatred of Russia or expressing 'dlscomfort' at Zelensky's 'shortcomings' as an 'economist' is as about as useful as saying 'it's a humanitarian issue'.
There is an argument that suggests the people of Ukraine might actually be better off if Russia took it over. It makes Putin responsible for it's people. Supplies of oil and food and maintaining basic infrastructure (electricity; heating; clean water; sanitation etc.)then become Putin's problem. And he has the resources to get it done !
@Picklebobble2 russia doesn't have enough resources to supply itself with flushing toilets and washing machines... but the terrorists are probably thinking more in terms of having enough cattle wagons and 'special camps' to achieve their desired 'final solution'
Maybe if the un and us stuck to the Minsk agreements 1 and 2 and stopped recruiting countries on putins border.. No? Maybe if they let Russia join the UN? No? What if Boris Johnson and Biden stopped scuttling peace negotiations? No?
@Ontheroad Ok. Have it your way. I take no offense. Because when one may not have the time or inclination to learn Geopolitics, it doesn't give one carte blanche, to disparage other opinions. 😊
@Ontheroad I do respect you, but this explain, prove, send a link thing is getting old. If one doesn't know by now, it's on them. Let the chips fall. I'm good with that. 😊
We can't even get an aid package through,the sanctions were about the most stringent that could be levied and no ones going to have boots on the ground......
@bookerdana moscow mike is blocking the aid package on trump's orders (which are of course putin's), and the republican party and its supporters are culpable in that treason. Their shame will endure.
I think Russia is weaker than many estimate ... they may be able to bully a smaller country like Ukraine but if the US and its allies actually joined the defense of Ukraine directly, I suspect Russia would eventually fall
I mean even the Soviets had to exit Afghanistan in the past, and the Tu-160 copycat of the B-1 bomber helped bankrupt and end the USSR
And I don't think the Kremlin, for all it's insane bluster, really wants to see its own citizens and its allies like China reap the consequencs of a nuclear war and global nuclear winter
Putin feels invincible right now, and if Ukraine was left on its own, he may well be, at that level
But if the battlefield was a level one, we'd finally see how hollow his authoritarian regime is
If the Ukrainians with drones and the limited material assistance they've been given to date can accomplish things like possibly bringing down one or two of Russia's few and prized AWACS-equivalent planes, imagine what a force that is Russia's actual equal (or superior) would accomplish
For the most part the Tu-22 bombers launching highly inaccurate anti-ship missiles at ground targets in Ukraine with the resulting high civilian death tolls prefer to launch these 2 missiles from a couple of hundred miles away ... US and allied planes could shoot these cautious bombers out of the sky even while the Russians try to remain at a safe distance
Honestly, as soon as we knew Russian forces were massing at the Belarussian border prior to the invasion (while denying plans to invade), NATO should've been massing forces on the other side ... we probably could've nipped this invasion in the bud
And the 2014 Crimea annexation should not have gone unchecked in the first place
Since we kicked the can down the road, we're still ultimately going to have to get directly involved, just like we did in World War 2, even though Europe was not part of any alliance like NATO
Otherwise this will not end with Ukraine, Putin and Russian nationalists truly believe they are restablishing the former Russian empire, and that they have some sort of perverse right to do so. They cannot be reasoned with. All they understand is being defeated. Putin aspires to be a tsar of yore.
lets keep sending them materiel support suggest the motti tactics, the Finns used in the winter war the Chechen anti tank squad tactics were good too remember when we "send : them money? it goes straight to our own manufacturing interests.. Maybe the Foreign Legion or other Euro Ground force[b] in reserve[/b] um.. don't elect the Republican LOL make a deal with..... [i]China [/i] many things to try
United States War in Afghanistan 19.9 years (19 years, 10 months) Vietnam War 19.4 years (19 years, 5 months) Occupation of Haiti 19 years Philippine–American War and Moro Rebellion 14 years
Maybe europe should have thought of that before adopting all the greenie nonsense, losing energy any independence, and relying on Russian oil imports, which in turn help fund Russia's war...🤔
@Ontheroad [quote]That's certainly an answer, but not the best idea.[/quote] Sure it is because that would solve the problem for the next 100,000 years.
@Diotrephes Yeah, I think wiping out 144m people is never the best idea, not to mention irradiating 3% of earth's landmass that is rich in minerals and natural resources.
@Ontheroad [quote]Yeah, I think wiping out 144m people is never the best idea, not to mention irradiating 3% of earth's landmass that is rich in minerals and natural resources.[/quote] Do you know how many nukes have been denotaed around the world? There doesn't seem to be any problems from that.
[b][c=BF0000]"According to the Arms Control Association, at least eight countries have carried out a total of 2,056 nuclear tests since 1945. Of those, 507 have been atmospheric explosions, which spread radioactive materials through the atmosphere.Aug 29, 2023" [/c][/b] https://www.aljazeera.com/news/longform/2023/8/29/visualising-the-2056-nuclear-tests-conducted-since-1945
