Russian Ukraine shenanigans

[Lawman]

When one resorts to attempting to disparage those who disagree, they've lost the argument. It was pretty well known that UKR was willing to give a little for peace (early on). We might not have liked the potential agreement, but why interject and directly cause hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians and Russians to kill each other with no realistic end game (other than kill Russians)?
Your liberal western idealism is obscuring your ability to see the nuance in all of the long history of UKR vs. RUS relationship and of course the current conflict. I've not heard any cheerleaders for Putin, but many of us see the historical cause and effect of US and other western "powers" actions, and "situations" all over the world. We've screwed the pooch in just about every foreign policy decision over the past 20 plus years. 
I'm not (and neither is anybody else) cheering for others, but I'd like us as a nation to begin to slow our roll and at least spend a few minutes before making decisions that put our military members in indirect and direct harms way with no clear goals, no clear threat, consideration of 3rd and 4th order consequences, etc.

Go get on SIPR and talk to your intel about the grey conflict area activities going in across NATO executed by Russia.

Pretending that this is just a fight between them and Ukraine is dangerously dismissive of active actions short of full scale combat they have levied against our NATO partners (and US citizens) stationed around EUCOM. And the media and leadership is complicit in non making it a bigger topic of discussion as to “why support Ukraine” or “why is this our problem” to their citizenry.

The direct combatant part of Russian actions to rebalance the scales the in the relationship against the west isn’t going well… it’s stalled on the battlefield in Ukraine largely because of continued support for this phase. That is deliberate action by NATO before it becomes a shooting war where the only opponents left enjoy article V status. The non direct combat portions (which preced combat) though are very much in full swing in the region in NATO countries, particularly the Baltics and Poland.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Majestik Møøse]

18 hours ago, bfargin said:

When one resorts to attempting to disparage those who disagree, they've lost the argument. It was pretty well known that UKR was willing to give a little for peace (early on). We might not have liked the potential agreement, but why interject and directly cause hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians and Russians to kill each other with no realistic end game (other than kill Russians)?

Your liberal western idealism is obscuring your ability to see the nuance in all of the long history of UKR vs. RUS relationship and of course the current conflict. I've not heard any cheerleaders for Putin, but many of us see the historical cause and effect of US and other western "powers" actions, and "situations" all over the world. We've screwed the pooch in just about every foreign policy decision over the past 20 plus years. 

I'm not (and neither is anybody else) cheering for others, but I'd like us as a nation to begin to slow our roll and at least spend a few minutes before making decisions that put our military members in indirect and direct harms way with no clear goals, no clear threat, consideration of 3rd and 4th order consequences, etc.

Root cause is Putin’s tiny dick and no one will convince me otherwise. Only Xi’s is maybe smaller

[ViperStud]

18 hours ago, bfargin said:

words…

Recent history matters, and UKR has had their territorial sovereignty violated twice in the last decade by the same hostile invading force. That’s a fact. Im not missing all the history of UKR-RUS, and considering my job I’m probably more well-versed on their 30-year history and current ops than most anyone here, but none of that excuses Russia’s current actions. 
 

WRT our policy, you’re right. We do not have a good track record nation building. The ME was a fvcking whack-a-mole debacle on a lot of levels, even if some of it was unavoidable. I argue this is different, though. We are supporting a sovereign nation (not trying to build one) against a long-term adversary of the west (not a bunch of radical shitheads). That particulars adversary is the second most prominent member of the SCO and has committed a host of belligerent acts against us and our allies. We are collecting a ton of info for a relatively (good argument to be had here) low cost. There are significant 2/3 order effects - want RUS to have a land bridge to Moldova? This is not AFG 2.0. 

[ClearedHot]

Wounded Russian soldiers – some on crutches – used in ‘meat wave’ attacks

[ClearedHot]

On 7/14/2024 at 10:42 AM, ViperStud said:

Recent history matters, and UKR has had their territorial sovereignty violated twice in the last decade by the same hostile invading force. That’s a fact. Im not missing all the history of UKR-RUS, and considering my job I’m probably more well-versed on their 30-year history and current ops than most anyone here, but none of that excuses Russia’s current actions. 
 

WRT our policy, you’re right. We do not have a good track record nation building. The ME was a fvcking whack-a-mole debacle on a lot of levels, even if some of it was unavoidable. I argue this is different, though. We are supporting a sovereign nation (not trying to build one) against a long-term adversary of the west (not a bunch of radical shitheads). That particulars adversary is the second most prominent member of the SCO and has committed a host of belligerent acts against us and our allies. We are collecting a ton of info for a relatively (good argument to be had here) low cost. There are significant 2/3 order effects - want RUS to have a land bridge to Moldova? This is not AFG 2.0. 

Amen brother...it is foolish to think Putin stops with Ukraine.  Look at what he has been doing with Georgia.

[bfargin]

On 7/14/2024 at 10:42 AM, ViperStud said:

better words ...

Thanks for the reply. I still think a compromise early on would have been best for the world, but I acknowledge both sides have merit (early compromise and all out war to free all of UKR). I appreciate you sticking to the topic rather than name calling.

[ViperStud]

5 hours ago, bfargin said:

Thanks for the reply. I still think a compromise early on would have been best for the world, but I acknowledge both sides have merit (early compromise and all out war to free all of UKR). I appreciate you sticking to the topic rather than name calling.

You’re still buying into the false dichotomy a bit too much - few in relevant leadership positions believe in all-out war to free all of UKR. All the GOs, house members, etc. I’ve dealt with know that a (hopefully sooner than later) brokered peace deal likely keeps lines ~where they are now. UKR senior leadership won’t say that publicly, and how could they? It’s not an “compromise” if you advertise your starting point to be ceding 4 Oblasts and Crimea.
 

That’s far less of a sticking point than future security. RUS guarantees mean nothing - they invaded twice now despite assurances post-USSR collapse and the Minsk agreements. You can’t blame UKR for wanting more than RUS assurances. They want a road to NATO, because article 5 is a security guarantee with teeth. You can’t blame Russia for not wanting UKR in NATO. That’s the sticking point, not kicking RUS out of Crimea. 
 

On a side note - my RUS simp comments not directed at everyone who disagrees with the above. They’re directed at those who don’t see they’ve been played by SCO member disinformation ops all along. We all know RUS and others ran IO campaigns during our elections and at other times, seriously get in a vault if you deny that. IMO the bigger issue isn’t if they were trying to influence a certain candidate (they weren’t), it’s that they convinced so many of us that all Western institutions are trash and that (secondary effect) someone like Putin isn’t a bad actor. I’ve been blown away by some friends who are convinced the RUS claims of UKR genocide are real despite dismissal from every intl humanitarian aid org and The Hague. Why? All those institutions are trash. 🤦‍♂️  So many have been hoodwinked by IO campaigns into looking past all the belligerent acts of our true adversaries. 

[BashiChuni]

Google search trend. The public doesn’t care anymore. 

Edited July 19 by BashiChuni

[brwwg&b]

Ah, yes...the ineffable knowledge of the public

[BashiChuni]

Germany cutting Ukraine aid in half. If I were Z I’d be negotiating a peace agreement. This adventure is over. Especially when trump takes over. 

[Random Guy]

Ukraine is hiring. Go get some guys. 🤣

 

 

[HeloDude]

5 hours ago, Random Guy said:

Ukraine is hiring. Go get some guys. 🤣

 

 

So we gave them F-16s, but no/not sufficient training.  I wonder what their mx will be like.  Where have I seen this before?

[brabus]

I’m betting we gave them as much training as we’re willing to give a country like UKR. Up to them to sort the rest out. 

[HeloDude]

2 minutes ago, brabus said:

I’m betting we gave them as much training as we’re willing to give a country like UKR. Up to them to sort the rest out. 

I very much would like for all of this to be “up to them”, but unfortunately our federal government seems to love giving them hundreds of billions of dollars of money/resources, putting us further and further into an unsustainable debt.  Giving them F-16s will only most likely lead to spending more money/resources, especially training and mx costs.  But hey, our defense industry appreciates the business. 

[Random Guy]

4 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

I very much would like for all of this to be “up to them”, but unfortunately our federal government seems to love giving them hundreds of billions of dollars of money/resources, putting us further and further into an unsustainable debt.  Giving them F-16s will only most likely lead to spending more money/resources, especially training and mx costs.  But hey, our defense industry appreciates the business. 

The debt is perfectly sustainable, the Fed can honor any liability denominated in USD.

 

It's just more free money (interest) for anyone with money who buys bonds. It's like welfare, but for rich people.

[HeloDude]

11 minutes ago, Random Guy said:

The debt is perfectly sustainable, the Fed can honor any liability denominated in USD.

 

It's just more free money (interest) for anyone with money who buys bonds. It's like welfare, but for rich people.

Enjoy your inflation and reduced purchasing power…

[Lord Ratner]

16 minutes ago, Random Guy said:

The debt is perfectly sustainable, the Fed can honor any liability denominated in USD.

 

It's just more free money (interest) for anyone with money who buys bonds. It's like welfare, but for rich people.

It is not sustainable if it leads to price instability. It is, as you suggest, payable, but if the welfare for the rich leads to social unrest, that is the opposite of sustainable.

Edited August 13 by Lord Ratner

[Lawman]

I very much would like for all of this to be “up to them”, but unfortunately our federal government seems to love giving them hundreds of billions of dollars of money/resources, putting us further and further into an unsustainable debt.  Giving them F-16s will only most likely lead to spending more money/resources, especially training and mx costs.  But hey, our defense industry appreciates the business. 

Well for one, we didn’t give them F-16s… The Vipers they have are from Denmark.

And yes the Danish are buying F-35s under FMS contracts (which lowers the fly way cost for us), so it’s not just a bunch of rich industrialists winning here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HeloDude]

9 minutes ago, Lawman said:

Well for one, we didn’t give them F-16s… The Vipers they have are from Denmark.

And yes the Danish are buying F-35s under FMS contracts (which lowers the fly way cost for us), so it’s not just a bunch of rich industrialists winning here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks for the clarification…but just so I understand, this isn’t costing the American taxpayer any money, is that what you’re suggesting?

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/07/10/joint-statement-on-f-16s-for-ukraine-from-u-s-president-joseph-r-biden-dutch-prime-minister-dick-schoof-and-danish-prime-minister-mette-frederiksen/#:~:text=The Danish and Dutch governments,operational F-16s this summer.

Edited August 13 by HeloDude

[Random Guy]

The term "unsustainable debt" implies there is some limit of numbers one can write in a ledger, and there is no limit.

 

Whether the real goods exist that people want to purchase is another matter. It has nothing to do with the numbers in the ledger, per se. 

[HeloDude]

13 minutes ago, Random Guy said:

The term "unsustainable debt" implies there is some limit of numbers one can write in a ledger, and there is no limit.

 

Whether the real goods exist that people want to purchase is another matter. It has nothing to do with the numbers in the ledger, per se. 

Well, I thought most educated people would be smart enough to realize the negativity of the “unstable debt” with how it relates to causing high inflation, reduced purchasing power, etc…you know, things that people generally don’t like.

Edited August 13 by HeloDude

[Random Guy]

Have you calculated your purchasing power wrt the inflation during and after COVID?

What is your representative basket of goods, and how did your quantities change with the new price levels in the US?

[HeloDude]

3 minutes ago, Random Guy said:

Have you calculated your purchasing power wrt the inflation during and after COVID?

What is your representative basket of goods, and how did your quantities change with the new price levels in the US?

Well, the grocery bills increased quite a bit since 2019, without much change in what we generally purchase.  If I had to guess it’s an increase of at least 25%, if not more.  Is my argument any less accurate if I have not directly compared receipts from 2019 and today of an item by item list?  

[M2]

1 hour ago, Lawman said:

Well for one, we didn’t give them F-16s… The Vipers they have are from Denmark.

And yes the Danish are buying F-35s under FMS contracts (which lowers the fly way cost for us), so it’s not just a bunch of rich industrialists winning here.

The Slovaks did the same with their MiG-29s, not sure how those are faring.

Ironically, the Slovaks are getting F-16 Block-70s, two of which were just recently delivered.

https://www.nationalguard.mil/News/State-Partnership-Program/Article/3851566/indiana-guard-helps-deliver-f-16s-to-slovak-partners/

[Lawman]

Thanks for the clarification…but just so I understand, this isn’t costing the American taxpayer any money, is that what you’re suggesting?
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/07/10/joint-statement-on-f-16s-for-ukraine-from-u-s-president-joseph-r-biden-dutch-prime-minister-dick-schoof-and-danish-prime-minister-mette-frederiksen/#:~:text=The Danish and Dutch governments,operational F-16s this summer.

I know you live in this weird world where the term, “total return on investment,” doesn’t exist, but yes in this case your original statement wasn’t in need of clarification it was a bold faced misstatement of truth.

You implied we simply gifted them weapons (in this case F16s) like allowing a person to simply walk in and out of Costco with a full cart and not pay. That is in no way representative of what is going on with these aid bills and it’s damn sure not an accurate depiction of a bunch of allied air and ground forces paying premium dollar totals to accelerate replacement of the systems they are donating to the Ukrainians. To say nothing of the investment in our own industrial capacity when most would agree this rollercoaster will get worse before it gets better.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk