Russian Ukraine shenanigans

[Prozac]

1 hour ago, BashiChuni said:

this is exactly the viewpoint of the globalists. i do not believe we have a vested interest in virtually every country on the globe. we might have to agree to disagree.

point taken that global peace and prosperity is a good thing for most humans though.

Call it what you want.  Both my grandfathers fought in WWII.  I was always a history buff and spoke to both of them at length over the years about their own experiences, and the American experience as a whole during the pre-war, at-war, and post-war years.  They both strongly held the viewpoint that an isolationist United States was a colossal mistake and that their generation's sacrifices forged this country's role as the leader of the free world.  Now that most of that generation has died off and today's young adults are several generations removed from that experience, I fear we're losing the plot.  I understand there are some who disagree, but I think it would be a disservice to the WWII generation if the U.S. were to return to it's isolationist ways.

[brickhistory]

US power has always flowed from our economic power, including our military power/leadership, especially post-WWII.

We are broke-ity-broke.

Russia has a genetic fear of being invaded from Europe due to the successive devastating invasions from Europe.  It has always wanted/needed buffer room from that and had it post-WWII.

The break-up of the USSR took that warm fuzzy away.  

NATO expansion eastward to Russia-bordering nations was steps too far for Russia (not just Putin).

Putin wants his blankie back and has the means, and more importantly, the will to get it.  Both economically via gas withholding and by brute force.

Old Europe does not.

If they don't give a sh1t, why should we?  Not our fight, not worth our blood and treasure.

Did I mention we are broke and literally can't afford to be global cop anymore?  Let someone else be the bad guy and we return to repairing our economy and institutions of liberty in order to become that beacon of hope as we were before.  Now, we are largely loathed and/or taken for granted.

I say again, not our problem.

[Lord Ratner]

4 hours ago, FLEA said:

I think you give too much credit to the US for it's role in world peace. Let's not forget about nuclear weapons making war too costly, globalism, capitalism, decline of monarchies and mercantilism, rise in telecommunications making the cost of war more visible to civilians. There's a lot to attribute to peace. 3000 years ago tyrant kings would cross an ocean because some dude on the other side stole his bottom bitched and walled her in a city. Today you need some moral justification for war even if you're a dictator. 

Yet almost everything you cited was overwhelmingly led or funded by the US.

 

Also made possible by the umbrella of military security we provided as the sole non-imperial world power.

 

To imply the world was headed this way is almost laughable. The world was literally headed in the opposite direction, that's why WWII happened. 

Edited February 18, 2022 by Lord Ratner

[Muscle2002]

9 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

100%

Not to derail the thread but the post WWII period is one of the "safest" in human history.  The video below illustrates the staggering impact of World War.  We tend to view things through our "USA" lens, if you take a slightly more worldly view you can see some horrific things that happen when there are world wars.  One small example, when Japan invaded China in WWII the Chinese Nationalist opened the dike at the Yellow River hoping it would slow the advance of the Japanese Army.  In doing so they knowingly sacrificed 500,000 Chinese civilians.  Yes there has been chaos and conflict and the news instantaneously beams it to our homes, but in relation to times past, the post WWII world order has been very favorable to the human race.

 

David Brooks' opinion piece in today's New York Times is worth a read.

"Today, across left and right, millions of Americans see U.S. efforts abroad as little more than imperialism, “endless wars” and domination. They don’t believe in the postwar project and refuse to provide popular support for it.

The real problem is in the seedbeds of democracy, the institutions that are supposed to mold a citizenry and make us qualified to practice democracy. To restore those seedbeds, we first have to relearn the wisdom of the founders: We are not as virtuous as we think we are. Americans are no better than anyone else. Democracy is not natural; it is an artificial accomplishment that takes enormous work."

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/17/opinion/liberalism-democracy-russia-ukraine.html

[hockeydork]

1 hour ago, Lord Ratner said:

Yet almost everything you cited was overwhelmingly led or funded by the US.

 

Also made possible by the umbrella of military security we provided as the sole non-imperial world power.

 

To imply the world was headed this way is almost laughable. The world was literally headed in the opposite direction, that's why WWII happened. 

Concur. It is one thing to be a democracy, another to be both a democracy AND a super power with a powerful military and economy. Saying Europe should step into our shoes just isn't really a feasible option. To many different cultures, languages and tribal-ness all swirling around jam packed next to each other. To think they'd be able to collectively lead as we have I don't think is an option. That however does not free them from contributing their fair part and at least backing us up. 

Also the assumption that progress just happens, and would have happened without the US (ie somebody pushing it) is false. Dark ages anybody?

Letting Ukraine slip without any resistance will be penny wise pound foolish. Putin is smart to capitalize on Americas aversion to conflict currently. The Ukranians are willing to fight for themselves it seems, they just need the hardware so they don't show up to a gun fight with a baseball bat. 

The amount of money well justify spending on our own weapons to counter  "an expanding Russia" will far outweigh what we need to spend now to keep the border where it is. Why stop at Ukraine, lets say he gets all of it. Once it's part of Russia why not keep pushing West again in 5 years?

Edited February 18, 2022 by hockeydork

[BashiChuni]

good thing we have a strong leader in the WH to deter putin!

[Prozac]

3 hours ago, brickhistory said:

Did I mention we are broke and literally can't afford to be global cop anymore?

We are the richest nation on the planet. By a lot.

https://www.investopedia.com/insights/worlds-top-economies/

While debt may be a cause for some concern, it is not the main factor in judging an economy or how rich a country is.  Most, if not all countries carry debt.  The fact that our economy continues to grow despite seemingly astronomical level of debt speaks volumes to the amount of soft power the U.S. can wield.  I don't think we should be so quick to willingly give that power up.  I'm sure China and Russia, who lag quite a way behind us economically would be more than happy to take on whatever debt necessary in order to displace U.S. power.  I don't see how a world where they run the show remotely benefits American citizens.

[Smokin]

You're right, we are still the richest country by far.  And while I don't think we should always be the only cop in the world, if we don't help defend a friend's house when we see someone about to break in, how long until our house is next?  We are still richer than we think if we straightened out our priorities a bit.  I think we are able, or at least could be able if we wanted to be money-wise.  The real question is, are we willing?

[bennynova]

We should save our money for more important things.   Like buying quarterly vaccines and giving pallets of cash to bad guys.     We are where we are because our leadership is incompetent.  

Edited February 19, 2022 by bennynova

[Prozac]

6 hours ago, Muscle2002 said:

David Brooks' opinion piece in today's New York Times is worth a read.

Wouldn’t mind reading that. Have a non-paywall link by chance?

[Day Man]

1 hour ago, bennynova said:

We should save our money for more important things.   Like buying quarterly vaccines and giving islets of cash to bad guys.     We are where we are because our leadership is incompetent.  

concur...like "leadership" that spreads unfounded rumors around aviation incidents? you have less than 0 credibility.

[Muscle2002]

8 hours ago, Prozac said:

Wouldn’t mind reading that. Have a non-paywall link by chance?

Try this link: The Dark Century

[bennynova]

13 hours ago, Day Man said:

concur...like "leadership" that spreads unfounded rumors around aviation incidents? you have less than 0 credibility.

You have less than zero ability to read a thread that started out as stating it was a rumor, and then proceeded to say,  “thoughts?”

 

[Lawman]

You have less than zero ability to read a thread that started out as stating it was a rumor, and then proceeded to say,  “thoughts?”
 

@Mods

Why is “this” still here?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[arg]

Who's in?

[Lawman]

Who's in?

I’m just gonna say it….

If we get involved in this war it’s going to cost a lot more marriages than the last two….


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[bennynova]

17 minutes ago, Lawman said:

@Mods

Why is “this” still here?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What’s different about it than what I quoted

[Clark Griswold]

If we (the Administration) are serious with the statement that the Russians are about to invade, why aren’t we surging this weekend for the inevitable refugee flows, reinforcing NATO members near Ukraine, etc…
Put your money where your mouth is, this seems like Obama’s red line statement regarding chem weapons employment then no response after that when we said they used them on civilian targets deliberately


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[herkbier]

2 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

If we (the Administration) are serious with the statement that the Russians are about to invade, why aren’t we surging this weekend for the inevitable refugee flows, reinforcing NATO members near Ukraine, etc…
Put your money where your mouth is, this seems like Obama’s red line statement regarding chem weapons employment then no response after that when we said they used them on civilian targets deliberately


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It is exactly like that. 

[SurelySerious]

They’re already at the UN saying there’s a genocide in Donbas against Russian speakers. Can’t wait.

[Lawman]

They’re already at the UN saying there’s a genocide in Donbas against Russian speakers. Can’t wait.

Time the start of active combat with the end of the Olympics.

Realize it takes advantage of the short attention spans and selfish nature of world media. Buys them extra hours to make gains before the general mob of people even realize it’s happening.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Lord Ratner]

3 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

If we (the Administration) are serious with the statement that the Russians are about to invade, why aren’t we surging this weekend for the inevitable refugee flows, reinforcing NATO members near Ukraine, etc…
Put your money where your mouth is, this seems like Obama’s red line statement regarding chem weapons employment then no response after that when we said they used them on civilian targets deliberately


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well this is the same administration with a different president.

 

Seriously, there are no "Biden" people. Never have been. Everyone in this administration is from the Obama camp. No surprise we're seeing the same weak foreign policy.

 

When your political ideology is founded on the idea that the evil in the world is caused by American interventionalism, the obvious strategy is to stop intervening.

 

And when that doesn't work, you stand at a podium and make excuses or outright deny reality.

 

Seem familiar?

[Prozac]

5 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

If we (the Administration) are serious with the statement that the Russians are about to invade, why aren’t we surging this weekend for the inevitable refugee flows, reinforcing NATO members near Ukraine, etc…
Put your money where your mouth is, this seems like Obama’s red line statement regarding chem weapons employment then no response after that when we said they used them on civilian targets deliberately


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/02/14/us-troops-in-poland-prepare-to-aid-refugees-if-russia-invades-ukraine.html

[Lawman]

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/02/14/us-troops-in-poland-prepare-to-aid-refugees-if-russia-invades-ukraine.html

Well after all it is the same Brigade and Command Structure that was tossed into the ring for he last foreign policy disaster.

They’ve got experience in this sort of thing now.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Clark Griswold]

3 hours ago, herkbier said:

It is exactly like that. 

Concur

2 hours ago, SurelySerious said:

They’re already at the UN saying there’s a genocide in Donbas against Russian speakers. Can’t wait.

Was pretty sure that would be the pretext / story / excuse.  

Well, we'll need an investigation, a study group all while the bear eats his kill.

2 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

Well this is the same administration with a different president.

Seriously, there are no "Biden" people. Never have been. Everyone in this administration is from the Obama camp. No surprise we're seeing the same weak foreign policy.

When your political ideology is founded on the idea that the evil in the world is caused by American interventionalism, the obvious strategy is to stop intervening.

And when that doesn't work, you stand at a podium and make excuses or outright deny reality.

Seem familiar?

True 

40 minutes ago, Prozac said:

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/02/14/us-troops-in-poland-prepare-to-aid-refugees-if-russia-invades-ukraine.html

Copy that, good on 'em.

 

NEO - are we gonna need it to get civilians out of Europe or just to the adjacent countries?  If they won't accept refugees (in the 100s of thousands or million plus), where do they go?

New security footprint in Europe?  If they invade, still an if, do we return to a sizeable US forces forward based deterrence posture?  One that is land power centric, how do we pay for it or do we rob Peter to pay Paul?

That's just the military / security part, does anyone in power today have the balls to go full Cold War and choke out the regime of Putin by other means?  Full spectrum DIME warfare but not going hot.