Russian Ukraine shenanigans

[gearhog]

8 hours ago, Lawman said:

I think you’re new wave rebranded isolationist BS is no less dangerous than the “it’ll all be ok” crowd that was laughingly dismissing Romney in the debates when he suggested Russia is our #1 geopolitical foe.

I think your entire presence in this thread is to do little more than try to play at being some sort of omnipresent intellectual when really you don’t realize your misgivings being the guiding beacon of what we should do (cut them off and let’s see) is more likely to result in a wider conflict not head it off at the regional level it currently resides in. Your apologist sentiment/statements for former exploited Russian satellites recognizing the reality and running to NATO because never again being a great example of that. Oh how dare the Czechs and Poles or Latvians want to actually stay sovereign. What a god damned crime. They should recognize they have old ties to respect and be more Hungarian in their outlook.

I would rather back Ukraine despite all their rotten apples in the cart than see yet another example of Russian aggression go unchecked and be successful in its results for their end goals. And you and others are flatly getting in the way of that with your “yeah but what if they attack our transport ship” bullshit from earlier.

We tried isolationism or rather “that’s a Europe problem” before. The end result was us getting into wider conflicts both unprepared and more expensively than smaller sooner conflicts would have cost. That was the reason we changed our mindset the last 70 years. Turns out just having nukes and oceans between us and conflict isn’t enough.

You seem to think a lot of things, and most of them untrue. Again, your preferred debate tactic is to either intentionally misconstrue or outright fabricate a position, attribute it to me, and proceed to lob darts at it. Weak. We, the United States, have expanded our global economic and military spheres of influences faster, and to a larger extent, than likely any other in history. I participated in it, as have you. I think you and I have done a lot of good in the world, but it would be intellectually dishonest for me to not also acknowledge we've overstepped many times, and also created some needless suffering. Remember Wesley Clark's claim that we had a shopping list of countries to overthrow after 9/11? We've checked them all off and have expanded the list.

What about Russia? What foreign military conflicts have they engaged in around the world last 20 years that makes you believe they were capable of challenging anyone's superpower status or had any intentions of a large scale military invasion of Soviet satellites? Chechnya? Their influence has been continuously shrinking. They've thrown nearly everything at Donbass and are barely inching along. I'm sure you'll claim that "Russia was going to do this! or Russian was going to that!" But the track record to indicate such just isn't there. Compare ours.

Do you think it's possible our leadership could continuously bombard you with claims of something being more dangerous than it is, fill you with fear, and convince you to allow them to aggregate vast amounts of power and wealth?... all in your best interest, of course. I think it's possible.

Again with the extremes. I'm saying we need to pump the brakes, not isolate. It's as if we can no longer function as a nation unless we're in a continuous state of emergency fighting imaginary boogeymen. We have a broken foundation and until we spend our wealth and resources fixing it instead of relying on hysteria and foreign conflicts as a reason to circulate fiat currency, plunge deeper into debt, and expand our already massive empire, this only gets worse.

"But imagine how much worse it would be if we didn't take these actions". Heard that before.

Russia likely believes it's fighting for it's existence. What does a Russia loss look like? They have publicly asked "Why should the world exist without Russia in it?" Negotiate an end.

Did the video of Zelensky rattling off a list of corporate sponsers like a NASCAR driver not give you any clue at all as to the ulterior motives that exist here? These tax dollars in these aid packages aren't being sent to Ukraine, they're being sent to the defense industry. Ukraine gets assets that are likely to depreciate to zero in .01 seconds while the cash gets deposited elsewhere: https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/general-dynamics/summary?id=D000000165

8 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

That's an easy one. Yes

Agreed. But Ukraine has repeatedly refused to even consider it.

Edited February 2, 2023 by torqued

[SurelySerious]

Agreed. But Ukraine has repeatedly refused to even consider it.

They won’t consider negotiating, or they won’t consider negotiating that includes ceding territory to the aggressor who invaded them? You’re putting the blame on Ukraine for something Russia is doing.

[Lord Ratner]

2 hours ago, torqued said:

Agreed. But Ukraine has repeatedly refused to even consider it.

And that's their choice. But as long as they have to rely on our weapons, training, and Intel, they have to do what we tell them to do.

 

Right now I see no reason to change the status quo. The Ukrainians want to keep fighting, and that's absolutely their choice, and I'd like to see more dead Russia soldiers and smoking tanks for however long they insist on invading a sovereign nation. And at bargain-basement prices, no, IDGAF about the spending. You're posing an alternative that doesn't exist:

2 hours ago, torqued said:

We have a broken foundation and until we spend our wealth and resources fixing it instead of relying on hysteria and foreign conflicts as a reason to circulate fiat currency, plunge deeper into debt, and expand our already massive empire, this only gets worse.

No one in power is willing to do that, in either party, and the largest voting block isn't going to vote for it. We will not fix the problem until it materializes and slams us into austerity, and that's not going to be a time-based event, it's going to be a debt-based event. Spending on Ukraine pushes us closer to that inevitability, sooner. That's good. Otherwise it would just go towards the nonsense domestic spending. You want to talk about appealing to the extremes? Your fairy tale let's just put the money towards responsible government spending is the most unrealistic thing I've heard in this thread. I wish it weren't, but it is.

 

And I really don't give a shit about nukes. Maybe you guys have never dated a truly crazy woman, but I have. Eventually every fight they lose gets to the suicide threat. The ultimate trump card. But what are you going to do, be a hostage forever? Fuck it, you want to kill yourself over breakup, go for it.

 

If Russia intends to unleash nuclear destruction over a failed invasion of another country, then they are operating on a different set of rules that we will never be able to follow. People will die, but we'll win that war. We're overdue for the fourth turning anyways: https://a.co/d/4gG2rqg

[gearhog]

11 hours ago, Prozac said:

We stand nothing to gain? From taking most of Russia’s pieces off the chessboard? From showing the Chinese how high invasion costs can be? From gaining valuable intelligence on how Russian supplied war machines work? From coalescing Western allies in ways we haven’t seen in decades? From taking the Russians out of the European energy game? Etcetera. Etcetera.

Curious as to what you think are more worthwhile foreign policy goals?

No. I'm saying that you and I, as individuals, do not benefit from this or at least not enough to morally justify sacrificing Ukrainian lives. Do you believe that your personal physical and financial security has improved enough to justify this? Naturally, there is political and economic gains to be had by the leadership whom this conflict benefits.

I'm not just creating these concerns out of thin air. I've done a little research before I've decided if my concerns were worth having. If anyone bothered to look at what occurred in Ukraine around 2014, this current crisis is not some noble endeavor to spread freedom and democracy. Around that time, Ukraine was being offered trade and economic incentives by the EU. Russia countered with an economic package of their own. President Yanukovych, who was elected in large part by Eastern Ukrainians who align with Russia. He began to indicate he favored the Russian deal. Obviously, this would mean a major loss to the EU and the US as they were counting on the economic and energy resources a country like Ukraine would bring to the struggling EU. Yanukovich had also signed a long term Sevastopol Naval Base lease with Russia.

None of this good for the West. Coincidentally around that time, pro-EU and Western Ukrainian nationalist protests broke out. They became violent and a coup took place. There were attacks on the LDPR aligned Ukrainians in the East by nationalist forces from the West. Poroshenko was installed and Eastern Ukraine was threatened with being barred from participation in elections. He also began negotiations with the West to remove the LDPR, terminate the Sevastopol naval base lease and lease it to NATO. Russia said "No." Invaded and took Crimea without firing a shot.

Russia was assisting LDPR in the east. They won battles against the Western Ukr. Then the UNSC sactioned Minsk agreements were to give LDPR autonomy, create a ceasefire, and remove foreign assistance from both sides. But those agreements were not adhered to, likely by either side. Conflict continued and a stalemate ensued. The West was getting impatient. In early 2021, Ukraine nationalists had a massive mobilization on the contact lines to take Eastern LDPR territories by force. They were receiving help from the US and NATO. Russia viewed this as a further expansion of NATO and began building forces on the border with Ukraine. You know the rest.

 

22 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

And that's their choice. But as long as they have to rely on our weapons, training, and Intel, they have to do what we tell them to do.

Right now I see no reason to change the status quo. The Ukrainians want to keep fighting, and that's absolutely their choice, and I'd like to see more dead Russia soldiers and smoking tanks for however long they insist on invading a sovereign nation. And at bargain-basement prices, no, IDGAF about the spending. You're posing an alternative that doesn't exist:

No one in power is willing to do that, in either party, and the largest voting block isn't going to vote for it. We will not fix the problem until it materializes and slams us into austerity, and that's not going to be a time-based event, it's going to be a debt-based event. Spending on Ukraine pushes us closer to that inevitability, sooner. That's good. Otherwise it would just go towards the nonsense domestic spending. You want to talk about appealing to the extremes? Your fairy tale let's just put the money towards responsible government spending is the most unrealistic thing I've heard in this thread. I wish it weren't, but it is.

And I really don't give a shit about nukes. Maybe you guys have never dated a truly crazy woman, but I have. Eventually every fight they lose gets to the suicide threat. The ultimate trump card. But what are you going to do, be a hostage forever? Fuck it, you want to kill yourself over breakup, go for it.

If Russia intends to unleash nuclear destruction over a failed invasion of another country, then they are operating on a different set of rules that we will never be able to follow. People will die, but we'll win that war. We're overdue for the fourth turning anyways: https://a.co/d/4gG2rqg

"They have to do what we tell them to do" - How would you characterize that type of power? Yet you go on to say, "The Ukrainians want to keep fighting, and that's their choice." Have you not seen the recent videos of Ukr soldiers being beaten and executed for not fighting? It's stomach turning.

"Spending on Ukraine pushes us closer to inevitable austerity, sooner, and that's good."

"Responsible government spending is a fairy tale."

"If you want to kill yourself, go for it"

"People will die, but at least we'll win. Besides, we're overdue for a breakdown in civilization." That is a good book, BTW. Read Generations, too.

I like most of what you have to say, but these ideas are all pretty dark. Maybe I'll respond later. Have a good one.

 

Edited February 2, 2023 by torqued

[Lord Ratner]

13 minutes ago, torqued said:

I'm saying that you and I, as individuals, do not benefit from this or at least not enough to morally justify sacrificing Ukrainian lives. Do you believe that your personal physical and financial security has improved enough to justify this? Naturally, there is political and economic gains to be had by the leadership whom this conflict benefits.

1. In what reality am I supposed to make geopolitical (support/oppose) decisions based on my personal physical or financial health? I must be reading that one wrong. 

2. Sacrificing lives? Show me the American that is forcing the Ukrainians to fight. FFS. They can end this war tomorrow. Are we sacrificing Russian lives too? Is everything our fault?

17 minutes ago, torqued said:

"They have to do what we tell them to do" - How would you characterize that type of power?

Power of the seller. You want an iPhone, you pay the fee Apple charges. Want to use the app store? You sign their EULA first. Lets try taking the whole quote this time:

39 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

But as long as they have to rely on our weapons, training, and Intel, they have to do what we tell them to do.

A little different when you don't selectively quote.

18 minutes ago, torqued said:

Yet you go on to say, "The Ukrainians want to keep fighting, and that's their choice." Have you not seen the recent videos of Ukr soldiers being beaten and executed for not fighting? It's stomach turning.

I have. And? I don't get your point. Are those Americans beating them? Have there been intercepted emails from Washington telling the Ukrainians they better get in there and fight, or else? How about some of the Russians raping kids and disemboweling them in front of their parents? No stomach turning there? War is fucking ugly. You show me the war that was civil and maybe we can talk, but until then this is just another dream that we can't base our foreign policy off. 

23 minutes ago, torqued said:

"Spending on Ukraine pushes us closer to inevitable austerity, sooner, and that's good."

"Responsible government spending is a fairy tale."

Read the tea leaves. We aren't going to responsibly-spend our way out of this mess. If you haven't figured that out now, I envy your optimism, but we aren't. We will spend until we hit whatever level triggers a massive upheaval that leads to the end of fiat (again). We'll get back to fiat one day, but everything goes in cycles. So between now and then we are going to spend XXX dollars of fake money, and I'd rather tilt the distribution towards spending that will weaken our enemies and strengthen our industries so we win the recovery.

Not spending on the good things does not equal spending less. It just means spending more on the dumb things. 

27 minutes ago, torqued said:

"If you want to kill yourself, go for it"

Clearly you've never dealt with that type of crazy. Lucky, but until you have you can't understand it. 

27 minutes ago, torqued said:

I like most of what you have to say, but these ideas are all pretty dark. Maybe I'll respond later. Have a good one.

I'm not upset about it, my life is pretty great. Most lives are a hell of a lot better, but that's because we are at a peak, I think. What's dark is what's coming, and I don't believe it can be escaped. Debts are always paid, and we have taken out huge debts to give everyone more than they are producing in return. That will have to come out of the next few generations, either evenly distributed (everyone has a lower quality of life) or unevenly (lots of people die, removing themselves from the list of debtors).

[gearhog]

1 hour ago, Lord Ratner said:

1. In what reality am I supposed to make geopolitical (support/oppose) decisions based on my personal physical or financial health? I must be reading that one wrong.

You may not be allowed to make the decisions, but you are allowed to have an opinion with regards to the immediate best interests of yourself and those around you. Can I not ask how this is making your life better?

1 hour ago, Lord Ratner said:

2. Sacrificing lives? Show me the American that is forcing the Ukrainians to fight. FFS. They can end this war tomorrow. Are we sacrificing Russian lives too? Is everything our fault?

Do you really think this conflict would be happening if Ukraine were acting in a vaccum? Not only is it easy to create a situation in which a leader can be compelled to send his people to war for the benefit of another, it's happened countless times throughout history.

1 hour ago, Lord Ratner said:

Power of the seller. You want an iPhone, you pay the fee Apple charges. Want to use the app store? You sign their EULA first. Lets try taking the whole quote this time:

A little different when you don't selectively quote.

I don't understand your analogy. In it, we're the seller, and Ukr is the buyer. What are they making purchases with? This is not a decision as to whether or not to buy a luxury item. As long as we are providing them with a means to survive in exchange for killing Russians, do you really think it's a choice?

1 hour ago, Lord Ratner said:

I have. And? I don't get your point. Are those Americans beating them? Have there been intercepted emails from Washington telling the Ukrainians they better get in there and fight, or else? How about some of the Russians raping kids and disemboweling them in front of their parents? No stomach turning there? War is fucking ugly. You show me the war that was civil and maybe we can talk, but until then this is just another dream that we can't base our foreign policy off.

Again, when you have created a situation where you have the means to provide or deny survival, you can't pass it off as a choice. I wholeheartedly agree that all the atrocities committed by both sides is ugly. We such an environment should never have been created in the first for the earlier claimed reasons of weakening a percieved threat, increase the availability of energy, and sustain economic development. Sorry your kids got disemboweled, but we just couldn't have Europe running on Russian natgas.

1 hour ago, Lord Ratner said:

Read the tea leaves. We aren't going to responsibly-spend our way out of this mess. If you haven't figured that out now, I envy your optimism, but we aren't. We will spend until we hit whatever level triggers a massive upheaval that leads to the end of fiat (again). We'll get back to fiat one day, but everything goes in cycles. So between now and then we are going to spend XXX dollars of fake money, and I'd rather tilt the distribution towards spending that will weaken our enemies and strengthen our industries so we win the recovery.

Not spending on the good things does not equal spending less. It just means spending more on the dumb things.

So hurry up and burn it all down now so we can have a head start in the aftermath. And you envy MY optimism? LOL

1 hour ago, Lord Ratner said:

Clearly you've never dealt with that type of crazy. Lucky, but until you have you can't understand it. 

I'm not upset about it, my life is pretty great. Most lives are a hell of a lot better, but that's because we are at a peak, I think. What's dark is what's coming, and I don't believe it can be escaped. Debts are always paid, and we have taken out huge debts to give everyone more than they are producing in return. That will have to come out of the next few generations, either evenly distributed (everyone has a lower quality of life) or unevenly (lots of people die, removing themselves from the list of debtors).

Apparently not. But I don't think I could allow myself to tell anyone to do that.

As for the rest of it: Uh.. YEAH. Debts are bad. Debts have created the mess. Debts get paid. This is going South. It's gonna be bad. Yet you spend a lot of your time trying to convince me that we should just continue debt spending and exacerbating the end result. It makes no sense. LOL.

It's as if you're saying you don't like drugs, but you're going to increase your habit in hopes that you finally overdose, get hospitalized and rehabed.

Edited February 2, 2023 by torqued

[gearhog]

Just in case anyone hasn't been sufficiently riled by what I've written, Germany has some interesting things to say the The Times.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/who-attacked-nord-stream-pipeline-russia-uk-west-ukraine-war-wv99ds7tx

If you don't have a sub: https://archive.ph/GE07Q#selection-963.185-963.467

“I understand, especially in times of war, that these delicate investigations may require secrecy,” Konstantin von Notz, the chairman of the German parliamentary committee that oversees the intelligence services, told the Tagesspiegel newspaper.

“[But] in a constitutional state, the public has a right to know what really happened. The federal government must break its silence very soon, create transparency, or at least present a plausible narrative.”

A failure to do so is likely to spark dangerous conspiracy theories and “wild speculation”, warned Roderich Kiesewetter, the deputy head of the Bundestag committee. It is also important, analysts said, to determine how the attack was carried out at a time when other critical infrastructure could be at risk during the war in Ukraine.

A western analyst, who asked not to be identified, admitted that he was surprised by the paucity of information that had so far been made available by investigators. “This was a major infrastructure attack. It’s strange that we’ve heard very little.”

The Kremlin has furiously denied any suggestions that it would have targeted its own pipelines, calling the allegations “stupid and absurd”. And some western officials appear to agree. The German investigation is thought to have made little progress so far, with officials having yet to uncover any compelling evidence. However, The Times understands that they remain open to theories that a western state carried out the bombing with the aim of blaming it on Russia.

August Hanning, a former director of Germany’s foreign intelligence service, argued late last year, however, that several other countries besides Russia could conceivably have had an interest in disabling the pipelines. He named the United States, Ukraine, Poland and Britain. “They all have their reasons,” he said.

All four countries, as well as the Baltic states, were opposed to the Nord Stream 2 pipeline over fears that the Kremlin’s weaponisation of energy supplies would increase Russia’s political influence in Europe at a time when relations between Moscow and the West were at a post-Cold War low.

[Lord Ratner]

Did you change your username, torqued?

[gearhog]

2 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

Did you change your username, torqued?

I did. No real reason. Just decided to switch it up.

[GrndPndr]

54 minutes ago, gearhog said:

I did. No real reason. Just decided to switch it up.

Receiving now?

Sorry.  However, I do want to thank you for the ToL link (above), I have a subscription and think that is well worth $2./mo.

[gearhog]

Yesterday, Zalensky lamented that the Ukrainian people have lost motivation. Not a good sign. 

“I believe that at the very beginning of the war, the spirit was stronger. We were all at war. In places where there was no occupation. We had a complete feeling that we were all at war. Now I see in some cities that they are rest. I think that this is a weakness," Zelensky said at a press conference following the Ukraine-EU summit in Kyiv.

In this regard, he called on Ukrainian journalists to unite in order to strengthen the spirit of the nation.

"I would like to appeal, first of all, to the journalists of our state. You need to unite as soon as possible, strengthen this spirit, remind those who are on vacation that we are all at war and remind you how it all began.”

It’s the journalists responsibility to get a population to support war. The State gives instructions to the journalists, and the journalists give instructions to the people. That’s how it is supposed to work, right?

https://interfax.com.ua/news/general/888952-amp.html

[DirkDiggler]

Humanitarian volunteer, Marine vet killed in Ukraine while helping civilians | Fox News

  Regardless of anyone's political views on the conflict, sad news out of Ukraine.  If any of you watched the show Hunting ISIS you'll recognize Reed.  After his service in the Marines he'd dedicated his life to medically helping people in conflict zones.

[BashiChuni]

sounds like zelensky needs to start negotiating for peace before he gets steamrolled this spring

[uhhello]

39 minutes ago, BashiChuni said:

sounds like zelensky needs to start negotiating for peace before he gets steamrolled this spring

Like last spring when everything was on Russia's side?  What is the difference maker this go around?  

[BashiChuni]

mobilization

[uhhello]

6 minutes ago, BashiChuni said:

mobilization

Do you think their second mobilization will fare better?  As far as I can tell, the first mob resulted in the loss of gained territory. They skipped the quality guys the first couple times around?  

Edited February 5, 2023 by uhhello

[uhhello]

Most estimates put Russian casualties at 200,000.  The initial partial mobilization sent an estimated 20k of age men fleeing to other countries.  They have cleaned out their jails to fill Wagner ranks.  With longer range weapons and expertise, Russians supply lines are getting much longer.  

Ukraine has to be getting thin on manpower but they are the defender at this point and they have shorter supply lines and the backing of the most of the free world.  I would think they have some fallback plans in place to bait the Russians a bit but I'm just a guy on the internet.  

[pawnman]

1 hour ago, BashiChuni said:

sounds like zelensky needs to start negotiating for peace before he gets steamrolled this spring

Surely the Russians are just about done hurling their conscripts at Ukraine to "deplete their weapons" and in spring the "real military" will come out...right?

[FLEA]

Ukraine is taking heavy casualties as well, and also has people fleeing to avoid conscription. These issues aren't one sided. It's accelerated attrition on both sides. Ukraine does have the advantage of being the defender though. They don't have to have the impetus to act. 

[uhhello]

22 minutes ago, FLEA said:

Ukraine is taking heavy casualties as well, and also has people fleeing to avoid conscription. These issues aren't one sided. It's accelerated attrition on both sides. Ukraine does have the advantage of being the defender though. They don't have to have the impetus to act. 

Agreed.  I think mother Russia is in the hole on this one though.  I can't imagine there are many Ukrainian fighting age males who aren't involved in the war effort in some fashion.  

[uhhello]

26 minutes ago, pawnman said:

Surely the Russians are just about done hurling their conscripts at Ukraine to "deplete their weapons" and in spring the "real military" will come out...right?

Phase 7 comrade.  Possibly 7.5

[BashiChuni]

Underestimate the Russian bear at your own risk. How many more hundreds of billions should we be willing to invest in the most corrupt country in Europe? 

Edited February 5, 2023 by BashiChuni

[FLEA]

22 minutes ago, uhhello said:

Agreed.  I think mother Russia is in the hole on this one though.  I can't imagine there are many Ukrainian fighting age males who aren't involved in the war effort in some fashion.  

There's a large community of them in my city right now. A lot of upper middle class males fled conscription by leveraging international business contacts to get overseas temp work visas. I live in a major financial hub that already house a large Ukrainian sub-population--which is how I became aware of it.

Its probably less so a problem than for Russia but its still a significant population. 

Its like the same thing that happened with Afghan terps/contractors. The country goes to crap and they start making phone calls to people they knew to help them navigate the immigration pathways. Unfortunately for the Afghans that tried this, US military members aren't in a great position to provide work related sponsorships. But with Ukraine specifically they had a lot of trade in arts/entertainment/wealth management with the US and Western Europe. 

Edited February 5, 2023 by FLEA

[pawnman]

33 minutes ago, BashiChuni said:

Underestimate the Russian bear at your own risk. How many more hundreds of billions should we be willing to invest in the most corrupt country in Europe? 

As much as it takes to utterly destroy Russia.  This is easily the most effective and efficient military spending we've ever done.  We've set Russia back decades, for less than the 10% of the DoD budget.

[uhhello]

It seems like both sides are willing to grind themselves down for this city.