Russian Ukraine shenanigans

[BashiChuni]

1 hour ago, SurelySerious said:

Cool, then supplying thousands of anti tank and anti aircraft weapons won’t be personal to the Russian people. Glad we agree.

We don’t agree lol but nice try

vietnam to the Americans does not equal Ukraine to the Russians. It’s not even close my man. 

Edited April 28, 2022 by BashiChuni

[Clayton Bigsby]

^ Man you really buy into that Russo-centric Manifest Destiny horseshit, don't you?

Edited April 28, 2022 by Clayton Bigsby

[DirkDiggler]

  Another solid video of Russians burning.

[BashiChuni]

3 hours ago, Clayton Bigsby said:

^ Man you really buy into that Russo-centric Manifest Destiny horseshit, don't you?

Nah my man just calling a spade a spade. 
 

we have zero national interest to get involved in a regional war that has historical ties that go back into the 20th century at the earliest. 

[SurelySerious]

We don’t agree lol but nice try
vietnam to the Americans does not equal Ukraine to the Russians. It’s not even close my man. 

The average russian likely doesn’t give two shits about Ukraine. You’re way hyping up the importance to anyone not named Putin.

[SurelySerious]

Nah my man just calling a spade a spade. 
 
we have zero national interest to get involved in a regional war that has historical ties that go back into the 20th century at the earliest. 

The National interest is not having aggressor countries walking into another one just because they feel like their empire was aggrieved thirty years ago. You know, the whole national sovereignty thing we’ve mostly held down since 1945.

[FLEA]

1 hour ago, SurelySerious said:

The average russian likely doesn’t give two shits about Ukraine. You’re way hyping up the importance to anyone not named Putin.

Let's be honest, you have no mandate or idea what the average Russian does or doesn't think. 

[FLEA]

1 hour ago, SurelySerious said:

The National interest is not having aggressor countries walking into another one just because they feel like their empire was aggrieved thirty years ago. You know, the whole national sovereignty thing we’ve mostly held down since 1945.

1.) We aren't proponents of sovereignty because we also violate it routinely without justification. Panama.... Iraq 2..... Syria...... So your point is simply an opinion. 

2.) Believe it or not there's a vast population of people in the US that don't care about other wars people get involved in. It may be an interest to you but there are a lot of Americans that would question why their sons or daughters should have to bleed for another country. And if they bleed for another country, who is left to bleed for us when our security is threatened. If American citizens lives or freedoms are jeapordized (civilians) defending a foreign power, the US did not practice good stewardship of defending those lives or freedoms. 

[Pooter]

Oh how short our memories are. A few months ago there was near universal lamenting on this very forum about how we entered Afghanistan without a clear justification, plan, or end state. And surprise! It ended in complete disaster. But don't worry we'll pin that squarely on Biden as if trump or literally anyone else had a more coherent exit strategy. 
 

A few short months later and people are chomping at the bit to insert themselves into a near peer potential nuclear confrontation over a country they just found on a map and just realized the blue and yellow flankers weren't also Russian ones. But I bet you understand decades of russian bitterness and resentment and have a perfect grasp of exactly how citizens of a totalitarian dictatorship are being brainwashed by their government. So let's go ahead and get super involved in the only place on earth that's a more reliable quagmire shitshow than the Middle East..

Edited April 29, 2022 by Pooter

[Inertia17]

2 hours ago, Pooter said:

But don't worry we'll pin that squarely on Biden as if trump or literally anyone else had a more coherent exit strategy.

Exiting without a strategy, or any kind of intelligent plan apparently, is squarely on Biden. Turns out Trump didn't pull out without a strategy... Abandoning our most defensible position in the country, before everyone was out was a ridiculous idea.

[SurelySerious]

Let's be honest, you have no mandate or idea what the average Russian does or doesn't think. 

Let’s be honest, you don’t.

[SurelySerious]

1.) We aren't proponents of sovereignty because we also violate it routinely without justification. Panama.... Iraq 2..... Syria...... So your point is simply an opinion. 
2.) Believe it or not there's a vast population of people in the US that don't care about other wars people get involved in. It may be an interest to you but there are a lot of Americans that would question why their sons or daughters should have to bleed for another country. And if they bleed for another country, who is left to bleed for us when our security is threatened. If American citizens lives or freedoms are jeapordized (civilians) defending a foreign power, the US did not practice good stewardship of defending those lives or freedoms. 

If you don’t make the international rules, someone else will.

[SurelySerious]

Oh how short our memories are. A few months ago there was near universal lamenting on this very forum about how we entered Afghanistan without a clear justification, plan, or end state. And surprise! It ended in complete disaster. But don't worry we'll pin that squarely on Biden as if trump or literally anyone else had a more coherent exit strategy. 
 
A few short months later and people are chomping at the bit to insert themselves into a near peer potential nuclear confrontation over a country they just found on a map and just realized the blue and yellow flankers weren't also Russian ones. But I bet you understand decades of russian bitterness and resentment and have a perfect grasp of exactly how citizens of a totalitarian dictatorship are being brainwashed by their government. So let's go ahead and get super involved in the only place on earth that's a more reliable quagmire shitshow than the Middle East..

Inserting into a conflict? No. Supporting the country that has been invaded is different.

[Prozac]

9 hours ago, Pooter said:

Oh how short our memories are. A few months ago there was near universal lamenting on this very forum about how we entered Afghanistan without a clear justification, plan, or end state. And surprise! It ended in complete disaster. But don't worry we'll pin that squarely on Biden as if trump or literally anyone else had a more coherent exit strategy. 
 

A few short months later and people are chomping at the bit to insert themselves into a near peer potential nuclear confrontation over a country they just found on a map and just realized the blue and yellow flankers weren't also Russian ones. But I bet you understand decades of russian bitterness and resentment and have a perfect grasp of exactly how citizens of a totalitarian dictatorship are being brainwashed by their government. So let's go ahead and get super involved in the only place on earth that's a more reliable quagmire shitshow than the Middle East..

Very different situations. We are now looking at a developed country that is democratizing and courting the free world that has been straight up invaded and is asking for help. This is worlds away from an I’ll advised war against an already shaky dictatorship or popping into someone else’s civil war hoping you can prevent more bloodshed.

I agree that in all honesty, we probably don’t care all that much about Ukraine per-se. But we do care about the idea of sovereignty. Very much in fact. We also care about Eastern Europe and Europe as a whole. If you don’t think this is Putin’s litmus test for Poland, Lithuania, Romania, etc, you’re being naive. And while we’re being honest, yes, this is a chance to affect Russia’s abilities to threaten its neighbors and hold Europe hostage over energy, which have been major concerns of ours for years now. To recap, our interests in the region are: the survival of a democratic nation and its people, protecting the very idea of sovereignty, hardening the NATO alliance (and finally getting Europe to pay its fair share & take defense seriously), weaning Europe off Russian energy, and sending the Russians something with a little more kick than the strongly worded letters they’ve been receiving from the UN the last several years.

And the icing on the cake is that our strategy does not involve any direct military confrontation with Russia. Sure there are pundits out there who argue we should act more aggressively, but I have not heard one voice from the current administration make that argument.  The Russians say we risk nuclear escalation by supplying weapons and support to Ukraine because of course they do. What other cards do they hold? None. Their conventional forces were apparently worse off than we thought and have been severely degraded from there. They’re quickly losing their biggest bargaining chip in Europe, energy, and it’ll likely be gone permanently. They thought they were good at information warfare, and maybe they were but they’re losing this one (at least abroad). So the one card they have left is waiving around their nukes. But Putin likes living. He likes his mansions and his boats and his girls. While he’s no 4D chess player, he’s smart enough to know that all turns to glass if he actually pulls the trigger. 

[jazzdude]

I agree that in all honesty, we probably don’t care all that much about Ukraine per-se. But we do care about the idea of sovereignty. Very much in fact. We also care about Eastern Europe and Europe as a whole. If you don’t think this is Putin’s litmus test for Poland, Lithuania, Romania, etc, you’re being naive. And while we’re being honest, yes, this is a chance to affect Russia’s abilities to threaten its neighbors and hold Europe hostage over energy, which have been major concerns of ours for years now. To recap, our interests in the region are: the survival of a democratic nation and its people, protecting the very idea of sovereignty, hardening the NATO alliance (and finally getting Europe to pay its fair share & take defense seriously), weaning Europe off Russian energy, and sending the Russians something with a little more kick than the strongly worded letters they’ve been receiving from the UN the last several years.

We don't really care about sovereignty. We care about maintaining our influence on the world, and one good way to do that is to ensure foreign governments are friendly toward our interests (and not Russian or Chinese interests). This includes supporting/working with authoritarian governments, so long as they continue to act in our interests (sure, we'll encourage democracy and human rights etc, but that comes second after maintaining our national interests/influence in the region).

There's no way that Ukraine is a litmus test for Poland: one is a NATO member and one is not, and the reaction is (appropriately) different.

The one good thing in all this is it's woken many NATO states up to the fact that Russia is still in fact a threat to their existence, and that they need to find their defense.

[Prozac]

47 minutes ago, jazzdude said:

We don't really care about sovereignty.

Not true. Everyone should care about sovereignty. That’s what makes trade possible. Ask most of the auto manufacturers on the planet. A large percentage of automotive wiring harnesses are/were produced in Ukraine. I guarantee you Volkswagen, Ford, and Toyota care a whole lot about sovereignty right now. Same goes for anyone who produces anything with a microchip in it. They’re anxiously watching Taiwan ATM. 
 

53 minutes ago, jazzdude said:

There's no way that Ukraine is a litmus test for Poland: one is a NATO member and one is not, and the reaction is (appropriately) different.

What do you think would’ve happened if Russia’s invasion was met with no resistance from NATO? There is a very good chance Putin would’ve come to the conclusion that NATO was ineffectual and obsolete and his next move would likely have been the Baltics. He has been testing NATO resolve there for years & if he thought for a minute NATO would not defend that territory, he’d be there in a hot second. 

[brickhistory]

17 hours ago, SurelySerious said:

The National interest is not having aggressor countries walking into another one just because they feel like their empire was aggrieved thirty years ago. You know, the whole national sovereignty thing we’ve mostly held down since 1945.

Why?

[pawnman]

3 minutes ago, brickhistory said:

Why?

Because no other country will ever consider a US "security agreement" as worth the paper it's written on, which creates real challenges when you try to develop forward areas to operate from.

[jazzdude]

Not true. Everyone should care about sovereignty. That’s what makes trade possible. Ask most of the auto manufacturers on the planet. A large percentage of automotive wiring harnesses are/were produced in Ukraine. I guarantee you Volkswagen, Ford, and Toyota care a whole lot about sovereignty right now. Same goes for anyone who produces anything with a microchip in it. They’re anxiously watching Taiwan ATM.

I agree that trade is important. But so long as industry stabilizes post conflict, I'd bet most businesses don't care who's in charge of a country, so long as money and goods keep moving.

What do you think would’ve happened if Russia’s invasion was met with no resistance from NATO? There is a very good chance Putin would’ve come to the conclusion that NATO was ineffectual and obsolete and his next move would likely have been the Baltics. He has been testing NATO resolve there for years & if he thought for a minute NATO would not defend that territory, he’d be there in a hot second. 

I think what NATO is doing now (providing and and supplies) is a good response. I don't think direct military involvement is in our interests, because Ukraine is NOT an ally Nora NATO member, just a country with some aligned interests (mainly screw Russia and their influence)

[frog]

3 hours ago, brickhistory said:

Why?

[SurelySerious]

Why?

You’d think that since Brick started his service during WWII, he’d remember what happens when a megalomaniac in Europe invades another European nation, but maybe it’s the dementia.

[brickhistory]

1 hour ago, frog said:

Godwin squared:

[frog]

1 hour ago, brickhistory said:

Godwin squared:

Well, we are talking about geopolitics, war, subjugation of other countries and cultures, and Eastern Europe. You are right, we probably shouldn’t talk about Hitler. Nice try.

[DirkDiggler]

https://apple.news/AVWwvUOY8Qxer238Tm5mirA
 

  Article interviewing the Mozart Group founder.

[ClearedHot]

4 minutes ago, DirkDiggler said:

https://apple.news/AVWwvUOY8Qxer238Tm5mirA
 

  Article interviewing the Mozart Group founder.

A good man and good friend, doing incredible work over there.