Leaderboard

They fully know it. It's just incompatible with their desire for empire building. The Russian/Chinese conception of world affairs is incompatible with the West. Either they adapt, or there will be war. My bet is the latter. But the longer we navel gaze, as you are doing, the longer they have to prepare for the fight. This is the epitome of "don't dress like a slut if you don't want to be raped." Does that mean we strike first? No. But it does mean we don't allow for any trade or economic interaction with countries that won't follow the rules, and we definitely put our full economic weight behind innocent countries (West aligned) that are attacked. We have, and continue to finance our enemies. You're dangerously close to relativism here, and relativism is always a losing philosophy, both in geopolitical outcomes and in general. There *is* a right and wrong. This is wildly illogical. America won the war. Turing and Einstein wouldn't have gotten much done without Patton and Macarthur, who wouldn't have gotten much done without Ford and Kaiser. Only an academic with major insecurities (i.e., academics) would make such an absurd claim. You have to be pants-on-head stupid to think we are going to negotiate Iran out of nukes. But you also thought we would be able to negotiate Russia and Putin out of imperialistic ambitions, so I guess that's consistent. The parallels between the appeasement of Hitler and the appeasement of Putin are getting clearer by the day. I fear the progression of conflict will follow a similar path. If not with Russia, assuredly with China. How do you appease a regime that identifies your downfall as a precondition to their success?

I'm wondering what rational person listened to that feces and thought "yeah, he seems to have it all under control". I get that his supporters know what he is and accept it, but how did that dumpster fire of a speech positively sway anybody's opinion??

Is anyone disagreeing with what Putin believes? We get it. He views the West as aggressive. Cool. Who didn't know that? Prove to me that if we didn't entertain the idea of Ukraine in NATO, Russia would have been content to maintain their present borders forever. You can't, which is why, despite your exhaustive repetition, you are merely repeating a theory. And you are using a class of people (who you hilariously claimed "win wars") who are wrong *constantly* when they make concrete predictions. I'm 100% positive there are idiots in Washington who believed we can invite anyone we want into NATO and Russia would do nothing. But I don't think you're arguing with any of those people here. I've expected Russia to do this everyday since they made their intentions clear with crimea. And I decided long ago that should they proceed, we should stop them. That is an opinion, much like yours.

Exactly that was the problem I had with the discussion. I have no desire to get Into a direct shooting war with Russia. I take issue that every time an academic discussion in the west it always seems to end with us having to be in the wrong some way and that all the other opinions have equal value. Fuk that…this war is Putin’s doing. I can completely understand why former Soviet republics would want to join NATO, it’s on full display right now. I completely disagree that the west has to do some kind of soul searching to figure out how we were wrong and forced Putin to invade Ukraine. Putin misjudged the west’s actions and I hope his economy crumbles and he is removed from power, preferably by a rope. In the meantime more sanctions, pump US oil and continue to dump weapons into the Ukraine to kill as many Russians as possible.

Thank you for showing your moral superiority to the rest of us. But I’d rather the US sit this one out. Your argument has been used over and over the better part of a century and look where it’s gotten us. “But this time is different…” By the way, you never answered my question as to if you have or have not bought anything made in China over the last few months? I imagine you haven’t…since you’re morally superior and would never financially assist a tyrannical regime like the CCP. Fortunately the Dems and Biden will just talk a big game and not actually do much…they know the politics of getting us involved with a war against Russia is not good. Hell, Biden won’t even cut off their oil because he’s afraid of the economic impact. But hey, get rid of that Russian vodka in the liquor stores!

There is a huge difference in supporting a military effort for a nation that *clearly" yearns for freedom, and the Team America world police bullshit we've been involved in for my entire adult life. The Ukrainian crisis is shaping up to be exactly the type of conflict the do-gooder American spirit is tailored to support. At a certain point, when you tolerate evil that you have the capacity to impede, you are being immoral yourself. We aren't there yet, but we are getting closer. Ask yourself, is there a line the Russians could cross in Ukraine that would justify direct military intervention by NATO/USA? If not, you need to get your morality sensors recalibrated. I'm sure the relativists here will disagree, but that's a morally bankrupt philosophy by design.

Or, hear me out here, YOUR opinions are based on a similarly perilous theory.

I don’t know Lloyd, the French are assholes.

Of course I have, but I'm also not dumb enough to think personal purchasing is equivalent to foreign policy. I do go out of my way (and spend more) to avoid Chinese goods where I'm able. Where has it gotten us? Literally the free-est and most prosperous the West (and the rest of the world largely) has ever been. South Korea and Taiwan are certainly better off. Germany, the rest of the EU, and Japan are looking pretty great too. I'm sure Israel appreciated our intervention. Sitting out Rwanda, however, was a bad look, and one of Clinton's biggest regrets. And when we pulled out of Vietnam there was an unfathomable slaughter in Cambodia. Afghanistan isn't looking to great, but I suppose zero deaths in the year prior to the withdrawal was too high a price for the "no more foreign wars!" crowd. It's trendy right now to act like our history is some comedy of errors. It's intellectually hollow and incredibly self-righteous to retroactively interpret history in the most negative light. The world is immeasurably better for billions of people as a direct response to US power projection. "The better part of a century" with American "interventionalism" has been pretty fucking good compared to the better part of a millennium without it.

Just saw this which kinda aligns with my current observation of the situation. Let's not forget Putin cares about himself, he can rattle the nuke button but deep down he's scared and knows that that'll be the end of mother Russia forever. He's scared shitless. Which is why he's thrashing around Bashi, dudes shitting himself sitting at 12 foot long tables and all. Putin can call them an act of war all he wants. Nobody cares, I think we'll see the end of him soon if the Russian people have anything to say about it. Imagine the American military killing Canadiens. F*ck that, this is going to boil over internally for him. How many Russian intelligence officers want this to be their legacy?

this conflict is rapidly escalating. putin calling economic sanctions an "act of war" if cooler heads don't prevail this thing is gonna kick off into WW3. hopefully old uncle joe is up for it. make no mistake of my position i want to give putin an off ramp, however if he wants to go then we should give him everything we got.

I’m tired of academics telling the the trigger pullers they’re so much smarter. Or the retired people telling me they have it all figured out. Wait, they did nothing in the cold war.

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-jordan-b-peterson-podcast/id1184022695?i=1000552617590 Just listened to Jordan Peterson’s recent podcast on the situation in Ukraine. Apologies if it’s already been posted…this thread has become a bit onerous to sift through. In this piece, Peterson interviews Dr Frederick W. Kagan who is eminently knowledgeable on the subject. While I often disagree with Peterson, he asks pointed questions in the interview that address a lot of what we’ve been discussing here. It’s a bit long, but an excellent discussion. Recommend anyone with a real interest in understanding the situation better give it a listen.

Yes absolutely. We should have stopped a while ago. We are literally funding our destruction. And the cheap tvs and phones of the past 30 years let the government run rampant with spending that is going to wipe out all the benefits of the three decades of globalization. So what the fuck was the point, besides the destruction of the American middle class? And you're incessantly quoting a class of people who have been obsessed with a cosmopolitan conception of the world for the past century. Yet every time they are proven wrong by reality, they have a new theory for why they were actually right and will get it right next time. Yes, your cherished academics told us that Ukraine could never be a part of NATO. That Russia would attack. And the Russian cherished academics explicitly call for the reincorporation of Ukraine. Not just if Ukraine joined NATO. You are clearly okay with that. The rest of us believe in a fundamental right, of humans, to freedom *if they want it*. And there is a direct correlation between the flourishing of free societies and the increase in the percentage of people across the globe that are part of free societies. A lot of brilliant academics told us that if we just embraced China they would turn into sitcom loving fast food eating freedomphiles. They had some pretty hilarious takes on Stalin too. And the academics were pretty gung ho about the democratization of the Middle East. Let's not forget how much they nailed the covid pandemic. Or that time they told us that carbohydrates were better for you than fat. There is a huge difference between forcing freedom and democracy on a people, protecting their right to pursue it themselves. You're trying to make your opinion more than what it is. But at the end of the day your opinion is that it is worth avoiding a war if it costs denying 40 million people the pursuit of freedom. I disagree. My opinion is that war with belligerent nations is inevitable, and allowing more people into the Free world has the long-term effects of reducing the likelihood of war.

Something just seems "odd" with a couple of the most vociferous posters. I'm not smart enough to recognize the "why," but it sure does seem like it. Of course, we have a couple of posters who are happy with the self-inflicted COVID vaccine casualties that an enemy couldn't do much worse...

It's amazing how they literally just argue that inflationary things are actually deflationary. No. I expect hyperinflation (already happening) to be reflected in the official numbers, especially as rent increases from last year start making it into the metrics. They are going to get slaughtered.

Nothing a random shallow can’t fix…

My line is the unprovoked slaughter/domination of one recognized nation by another. Sovereignty is a fundamental to the modern world order. That is a vital interest, especially as the eastern European countries continue developing into formidable economic powers, which benefits any Western-aligned nations through trade. And our biggest adversary world *love* the new precedent of "borders are... Flexible." What about Moldova? Taiwan? Finland? Sweden? Indonesia? Bari Weiss hosted a great debate on her podcast "Honestly" between Matt Taibbi and Bret Stephens about interventionalism. I like Taibbi a lot, but his selective ignorance as to the many success stories of US intervention is very similar to attitudes being expressed here. And no, I don't think we should be boots-on-the-ground in Ukraine, nor should we have a NFZ. Yet. First we should *actually* cut all financial connections with Russia. Zero transactions, full asset seizures, and no tolerance for other nations who support Russia. You want to do business in the US, you don't get to work with the enemy. But if the intentional targeting of civilians becomes the rule, or a tactical nuke is used, then we absolutely should.

If any of you guys decide to start the Second Volunteer Group and get your Chennault on, do yourselves a favor and adopt some medium altitude tactics. These Stinger/MANPADS videos are pretty gnarly.

No, sir, there is not, provided the action is against Ukrainians or Russians. I applaud the Ukrainians giving the Russkis a bloody nose and I hope they eventually hand Putin his ass. Please demonstrate what US vital national interests are concerned between Russia and Ukraine? What is the line you deem worthy of US blood and treasure?

Never thought I'd love a dude packing a Russian manpad but that day has come! Not sure about the part that he shot down the Su-30M but hope that's true too. On the serious discussion side, I'm in the camp of the no NFZ by us or NATO. Keep supplying them with Javelins and Stingers and it seems like they will be able to "win" in a protracted battle of attrition. Definitely going to be brutal on the civilians but appears by and large that they are all in on shedding blood for their country.

I get a little pumped up when I watch war movies as well…and then realize that war sucks and it’s best to not get involved unless absolutely necessary (this definitely isn’t necessary). As I mentioned 1-2 weeks ago, the war hawks in the US are definitely out there…even some on this site.

Was sharing some airspace with guys on their way out to do some air to air the other day. The red air call sign was Ivan.

For whatever it's worth I'm not going to have a say in this soon. I will be a civilian shortly and as much as I love this world, it's a world the AF won't let me stay in and I need to find something else. Point being, for myself, and the rest of the civilians in society, we are trusting you with our security and to make good decisions with it. Sure, myself, and other Americans, are outraged at what is happening to the Ukranian people. We are even willing to pay higher gas for it. But how many of those people, if you explained to them the realities of nuclear war, would be willing to accept that risk on themselves and their families, for the sake of proving a point? Your oaths of office are not to NATO, and not to Europe. You swore oaths to the US constitution and your obligation is to the United States, it's people, and it's interests. We are trusting you to keep those interests, mainly our lives, our safety and our freedom, at the forefront of your decision tree. If you are failing to do this for some obscure reason, you are failing us, and that to me is sad. Very few people on here have communicated how in their world view they are going to continue to protect US interests. I have no problem with radical plans to ousts evil dictators, but I'm not willing to risk the lives of my wife or children to do so. For those of you that stay, you do so at great peril and I thank you for that. The world may be on the precipice of entering the most complex security environment we've seen in 30 years and I'm hoping the redundancy of operations in the GWOT didn't mend our thoughts into ones based on complacency. I only hope that the US makes smart foreign policy decisions that value our troops and their lives appropriately. I pray that your generation never have their "Afghan moment" which is something that left me and many others with a striking amount of moral injury. If we are going to be the leader of the free world we need to recognize that is a job that is hard, needs to be taken responsibly and will require us to make tough decisions about our values and the values of our own people. There will be pressure from other countries to mold the world into their own order and we need to resist that, applying pressure where we can, but recognizing that US power and resources are limited and should not be squandered. That's really all I have. I have weeks left. Going to be a wild transition but I'm ready for it and I'm really excited for what's next. I sincerely wish the best of luck to all of you.

The rest of the world doesn’t have to accept his narrative that backs his maniacal plan. Quit giving in to his bs.

We shouldn't limit our thinking to only military means to achieve our strategic objectives, which can be hard for us as military officers to consider seriously (when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail). We seem to have done very well controlling the narrative internationally on what Russia is doing, and leveraged that into widespread support for significant economic sanctions on Russia. Even to the point that historically neutral countries were convinced it to be in their interests to follow suit on sanctions. One downside of the American way of life is that we generally are not patient and want big actions and fast results. Use of military force can be a way to get quick results, and often works much faster than the other instruments of power. But the quick response isn't always the best response. Sanctions take time to build that pressure on the target to change behavior, but allows us to deny Russia a reason or justification to expand the fighting and drag the western world into WW3. In the meantime, we need Ukraine to keep fighting Russia to buy time for the sanctions to work, so the western world has been funneling arms and supplies to them to support Ukraine's fight to remain independent. The cynic in me says this is also good for American defense contractors to make a good deal of money selling those arms... And furthers our goal to be the partner of choice when it comes to military equipment sales and strengthening economic ties. The sad truth is that as a nuclear power, if and how Russia is engaged militarily matters because nukes are on the table, and they have too many for us to target and neutralize to take nuke off the table. It pushes military action to being a last resort, and only to be once the other instrument of power have failed to achieve our objectives. Even if Russia didn't maintain it's nuclear force well, there would still likely be enough useable nukes to act as a credible deterrent

FLEA, I get your point about Russia having legitimate security concerns. And that we should understand them and incorporate them into our strategy. But you have to see man that sooner or later, freedom was going to clash with tyranny. This war was unavoidable, it was going to happen eventually somewhere because Russia is a totalitarian police state wearing a "we have free elections" sticky note on its forhead. Dictators are never safe unless they control everything and everyone. Let's run a hypothetical, which I agree is a hypothetical and pure speculation. But hear me out. Russia invades Ukraine, they take it fast, minimal bloodshed because the Ukrainians were too scared to fight. Now the Russian border is jammed right next to Poland. Is Russia going to disarm and chill because it has a buffer now? No, their regime will always be threatened when a democracy is on their doorstep. And unless they can stretch all the way to the Atlantic, they'll be threatened. They're going to continue on the path of military strength until they think they can contest the next country. This conflict was going to happen, now or in 10 years, there were no off ramps. The only off ramp was the Russians installing a government that didn't lie to its people constantly, deal in deception, oppression and assassination, and basically ensure the rest of the world could never trust it. If you wouldn't turn your back to Putin in an elevator, that tells it all.

Because it wasn't a theoretical red line it was a very real red line that we knew about and we have recognized and talked about for decades. Noone on here is apologizing for Putin. We are accusing everyone of not taking him serious. You are all just falling into a trap of believing he is an irrational clown that just bungled himself into a disaster and I'm afraid that complacency widespread in US government is going to lead to the US getting out maneuvered by him. This dude knows what the fuck he is doing. He's been doing this for a long time.... And he's gotten really good at it. Even now the way the media covers his invasion they are making it seem like he is failing at every turn. However, we know Russia is actually probably meeting or exceeding their own measures of success. The stuff they are losing was expendable and was being used to set forward supply post, critical nodes, and infrastructure for their follow on forces. It's very possible the west is going to face a moment of shock in about a week when Kyiv is surrounded and we can no longer get aid in or out. I'm not an expert on Soviet combined arms doctrine but there are lots of people who are that are highlighting this and yet we still want to focus on the 18yo conscript who forgot to set the tanks parking break as representative of the whole Russian military backbone.

So the Ukraine can choose to align themselves with whoever they want but we can't? We are obligated to an accept an alliance with anyone that ask for it. Interesting take.

Ahhhhh nothing like a good ol security crises to cement those approval ratings before going into an election your party is unpopular in.... https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/596890-bidens-approval-rating-jumps-to-47-percent-after-state-of-the-union-address

T

Why would Moldova change your calculus? Not a NATO country. Why would Finland change your calculus? Not a NATO country. Or is your assertion that only Ukraine is so useless and backwater as to not warrant a response? AFTER, may I remind you, signed security agreements with the US in exchange for their nukes. If this is what a US security agreement buys a country, we're at a real disadvantage in any diplomatic efforts to counter China or Russia in the future.

I haven’t once said that. This whole burst of debate was caused by another poster claiming that the US is at fault because we “expanded NATO to Russia’s door step”, which is such a load of bullshit it’s laughable. Yeah, yeah, you’ll both follow up with that, “that’s just your western opinion man”. That’s such a lazy statement and you could literally counter every terrible thing that’s ever happened in the world since the beginning of time with “well the other side saw it this way”.

Dude, everyone here gets what you're saying. The Russians (well, mostly Putin) view NATO and its growth differently than we do. That's not in dispute. Decades old promises from former US and other world leaders is great, but geopolitics changes and, like it or not, the people that lived in these former Soviet republics get a say in how they want to live and be governed, and they have overwhelmingly clamored to be part of the western system and NATO.

So when he invaded Georgia and Crimea that was all a cry for help? You guys should ask for a refund on your AADs.

So originally you said that the West “openly supported” the “violent overthrow of the Russian government” but now you admit that’s not the actual truth, but rather Putin’s perceived truth? Am I reading that right? In any case, why are you advocating giving a dictator what he wants simply because he sees the world through a different lens? This isn’t rocket science. His lens is the wrong one. Shitting on your own people and your neighbors in order to consolidate your own power and wealth are wrong. There’s only one side to be on here and it’s not hard to figure out which side that is.

The fact that he warned the west doesn't make it the west's fault that he invaded a sovereign country without even a hint of a pretext. Your argument is basically the same as "she wore a mini-skirt, so she was asking to get raped". Not ok.

I don't know about you folks but I am sick to my stomach watching this unfold. I am older than most of you and I remember the cold war, there was always an uneasy feeling in the background as we looked across the wall at the USSR. I remember the joy and celebration when the wall came down, the hope, watching freedom on the faces of many formerly oppressed people. There is no reset button, our relationship with Russia will obviously be very dark for years to come, in my lifetime things will never be the same. I was watching CNN a little while ago and the story and picture of the Ukrainian Father crying over his dead son...I can't even process it thinking of my own son. Like many of you I flew a lot of combat missions and saw a lot of horrible things, but this is fucked up and it is only going to get worse. How will we be remembered by history? As we sit by and let potentially millions be slaughtered. I know there is no easy answer and we have peeled this onion every way possible but it is a hopeless feeling to watch this brave people getting mowed down.

Many years ago I saw her in OKC. Really a thing of beauty. The cargo deck felt like a gymnasium. Say what you will about the Russians but they do understand heavy lift. Another example is the MI-26 Helicopter.

Hired by a contractor for 300k a year for Red Flag

Footage of the 225 burning from the link somebody else gave.

Between all the verbal fellatio about how we were getting a “masters class” with all of your apologist drivel you literally stated “Why yes... I am saying we should have stopped NATO expansion in 1990 when we had the chance. There wouldn't be a Vladmir Putin problem if we did. Not only that we had several off ramps including up until February when Vladmir Putin sent President Biden a list of demands thatencompassed his security concerns in central Europe.” You are blaming NATO for not taking any off-ramps from Putin’s demands implying that because we didn’t bend to his demands we are responsible for what happens next. So while I didn’t go through and reread everything it was very clear that you were heavily implying the west forced Putin into attacking in Ukraine by crossing some red line you theorize exists and it’s our fault for not understanding him. Ukraine can choose to align themselves however they want they should not have to serve as a buffer if they recognize the value of relationships with the west and choose to pursue them that is their sovereign right and not an excuse to be invaded by a power hungry despot.

You must have been in the 99th percentile on the AFOQT, flown the OV-105A and developed fusion reactors. Watch everyone Brickhistory the worlds smartest man is here.

For fuck sake we've already argued through all of this. Nothing you have said above holds water to anything. Either go with evidence for any of your claims or just admit they are your biased opinions you learned on your 18th rewatch of Red Dawn. I don't really care to debate people who deliberately remain uninformed about an issue.

Also, what are you going to do when we oust Putin and Russia popularly votes for another Anti-American dictator? Because mainstream Russians don't really like the US or US foreign policy. Are you just going to keep warring with Russia until every single person in that country agrees to vote for someone who is pro-US?