War in Ukraine

They’re just so …peaceful.

 

US paid for the overthrow of a democratically elected Ukrainian president, because we love democracy

 

Five Takeaways From Trump’s Fateful Decision To Freeze All Military Aid To Ukraine

 

Ah yes, the always credible Mike Benz (the man with opinions but never a single fact) and the author of the Clinton Administration's "Shock Treatment" which collapsed the Russian economy and put Putin in power.

So credible.

Almost as credible as information from the rando who wandered into too hot in October but never posts on the football board. Probably because he spends that time on the Zenit St. Petersburg site instead.

 

Wow, sellout!

 

Hopefully Ukraine is ready. It had to suspect this would be the outcome of Trump being elected. If the EU doesn't want Putin on its borders, it needs to put its ass in gear pronto...

 

Imagine Canada will step up and take them if it comes to that.

The Trump administration is just a hot pile of steaming shit stain on our country.

 

We were so eager to feed Ukraine to Russia in hopes that Russia would choke.

Biden doesn’t get to hide behind Trump due to another US defeat.

 

OTOH, looks like Trump is about to send Zelensky fresh troops!

 

And it has been doing so.
Live updates: EU leaders hold emergency Ukraine talks after Trump suspends aid
EU support for Ukraine | European Union

 

Back when America was great. I guess we know how Trump would have responded to this survey in 1938.

Or this one in 1939.

 

During the course of the war I’ve met a goodly number of able-bodied Ukrainian me in business circles and in my neighborhood. These are not beleagured people. Clearly they are not up to fighting Russians. Neither are 7 to ten million others, a goodly portion of whom have fled to Russia.

 

You couldn't be more wrong. This has very little to do with NATO's longevity going forward. Take politics out of this and look at it pragmatically. We have three choices. They are as follows:

Option #1 Continue the same course and hope for a different outcome. Yes, doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome. The insanity argument. i.e. fighting a proxy war, sending Ukraine hundreds of billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars after having done so for 3+ years and watching Ukraine make zero headway. (ex. much-hyped counteroffensives have flopped) Meanwhile Russia has made steady, albeit incremental gains in the interim and continues doing so as we speak. It is not realistic, nor in our best national interests to continue throwing tens of billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars into a proxy war yielding zero results, while at the same time claiming the lives of thousands each week. It is a humanitarian crisis if there ever was one and we are burning large sums of U.S. taxpayer funds in the process.

A proxy war rests on the idea that the proxy can actually execute the objectives on the ground. We've had more than enough time to evaluate this and are sufficiently advised Ukrainian forces are not capable of executing the objective. It's been claimed we need to throw MORE money at this for Ukraine to have a chance. Yeah, right. That's not a viable plan, because one, they've already shown an inability to execute on the aid given thus far despite predictions of grandeur and two, when it inevitably fails like all of the previous aid packages have failed, Ukraine loses even more leverage every time. Why? Because by making this a proxy war, NATO have shown they have no interest in a direct entanglement with Russia and that their hopes rely solely upon Ukrainian forces ability to execute. Every time it is proven Ukraine cannot execute the objectives, Russia gains leverage, because Russia knows direct NATO intervention isn't in the cards. After all, if it was, NATO would have simply handled it themselves from the start.

Option #2 direct NATO intervention, which has been off the table from the beginning for obvious reasons. After 3 years of a proxy war that has cost hundreds of thousands of human lives on both sides, direct intervention into the war by NATO would guarantee World War 3. And then you have the two countries with the most nuclear warheads on the planet at war with each other, along with all of Europe. Probably not a good idea. Hence why NATO hasn't done it.

Option #3 a peace treaty which firmly establishes boundaries, parameters and order in Europe and at the Ukrainian/Russian/Belarusian borders.

Only one of those options ends the humanitarian catastrophe. Only one of those options has a realistic chance of success. We are not going to subjugate the largest country in the world, who happens to have access to the most natural resources in the world, who happens to have the 2nd largest army in the world and oh yeah, who happens to have more nuclear warheads than anyone else in the world, via proxy. Time for a peace treaty.

 

Option 1 is not insanity - we are a full 3 years into a war Ukraine was supposed to lose in a matter of weeks. Clearly the aid is helping. We gave aid to Afghanistan for 9 years when Russia invaded. Afghanistan lost 10x as many soldiers as Russia, in so far as KIA, yet we still supported them.

 

The war has given birth to a new term!

 

i'll only charge you 20% of your earnings..

wish I could find comparable with lower expense rating

EUAD – Portfolio – Select STOXX Europe Aersspc & Defns ETF | Morningstar

 

^^^^This is why duggers_dad is the best poster on the board

 

So Trump finally got his orders from Putin on what he wants. Apparently Russia will refuse to negotiate until certain demands are met.

https://youtube.com/shorts/nfgQYEMa65g?si=gDxE8PsHrEB6_W1w

 

This is complete bullshit. Russia's economy is on the ropes and Ukraine is actually reversing progress on the battlefield as we speak as the ability of Russia to attack has lessened due to Putin shooting his entire load before Trump took office, knowing that Trump would provide his "Get Out of Jail Free" card, if he needed it.

And trust me, he needs it badly. If he doesn't stop the war before 2026, his bid to become a major power again will be over. Which will deter China from a similar stunt with Taiwan, which is the outcome we desire from a national security standpoint.

Ukraine is now producing 96% of their drones domestically and they are causing 87% of all Russian casualties. 2.5 million drones will be produced in Ukraine this year and possibly even 4 million. Do the math.

Russia is exhausted and their military is in shambles. Their casualties have continued to climb from 1000 to 1500 casualties a day over the last year or so. Their Black Sea fleet can no longer operate in the Black Sea, making Crimea only useful for aircraft, if they aren't targeted also.

Crimea was the entire prize for Russia when they couldn't take Ukraine as they built a land bridge to it, but it has vulnerable supply lines now. It will inevitably come back under control of Ukraine because Putin will not last forever and the Russian military will not have the resources to beat Ukraine next time. They will be ready, just like Finland is.

The fact is there are a good many people in this country who do not realize that Russia is/has been/will always be our enemy. Their culture of solving domestic problems with external wars guarantees it.

Trump wants to hand Putin Ukraine on a plate because he works for the Russians, but he won't be able to deliver it. Meanwhile, Putin's dick is in the mousetrap of a clusterf*ck of an invasion where he has now been counter-invaded and has to split his forces to try to take terrain favorable to Ukraine in two places.

Which is a military strategy which will drain his forces and money quicker and ultimately will lead to Russia's internal collapse if we keep the pressure on. The only way Putin wins is if we let him.