This is the type of person everyone should be listening to. He actually is someone who knows WTF he's talking about and has the resume to back it up. A no fly zone is a bad idea. You have to think like Putin thinks. He would use that as an excuse to escalate and from the way this whole thing has gone from the start he appears to be a bit off his rocker and divorced from reality. He may even believe that Russia has the ability to withstand or survive a nuclear attack for all we know. Things are not looking good at all for the Russians. They have problems with moral both in the army and at home, their equipment is crap, their logistics are crap, their commanders are crap and they are facing a very determined foe. Even if they took Kiev there is no way they can "win". They don't have any way to rule Ukraine. They have no way to "occupy" Ukraine. Heavily arming the Ukrainians with anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles along with drones and keeping them continually well supplied will turn this war, I believe. How it will play out in the end after the Russians are finally faced with the reality that it's a losing battle is anyone's guess when you're dealing with a guy like Putin.
If Ukraine is using those MIGS to attack Russian aircraft who are invading their airspace, I would not consider that an "offensive attack", rather they are defending Ukraine.
I think the sticking point that Russia can point to (or so the argument goes) is that they'd have to take off from Poland for example, which is a NATO country, and unless you paint a Ukranian flag over it, it would have the Polish flag on it. So he could see that as direct NATO involvement. No one with a shred of intelligence or common sense thinks Putin is thinking remotely logically right now, though, so to him that's what he'd see. Even though it isn't any different. He's already been saying he views the supplies as an act of war, so at this point I wouldn't be shocked if he gives an ultimatum to stop supply lines or get nuked.
Rationally, Putin should cut his losses and withdraw in turn for a pledge of neutrality on the part of Ukraine and recognition of the Russian annexation of Crimea and maybe informal recognition of their occupation of Donbas. Ukraine should not and almost certainly will never agree to disarm. Putin isn't always rational though, as Tom Friedman speculated in the column I linked in post #4477, the chances are using Friedman's words Putin will most likely end up losing late and big and deeply humiliated rather than early and small and a little humiliated. Tragically, tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian civilians as well as tens of thousands of Russian conscripts will end up losing their lives in the process.
my initial thought is reluctance. A few different concerns; armaments sent to Ukraine so far have been defensive. Ie. They can’t really shoot a javelin into a Russian city. Fighter jets is a while other situation. Would Ukraine fly into Russia in an offensive attack? We don’t think so? Just providing them with jets might be enough for Russia to bomb Poland\other air bases where the jets and supplies are transferring from. Also, I’m not convinced giving them jets is the panacea we think it is. How many would it take 10? 20? 50? Will it stop the Russian Air Force? Does Ukraine have the abilities to maintain and keep them fighting? Lastly the obvious reason, Putin. It’s now unlikely he’ll reach his goals in his attack of Ukraine, he is becoming cornered and seemingly irrational. If we give them jets are we hoping he won’t escalate? Do we counter? To what end? Remember, this is Putin. an effective alternative could be more advanced Sams with longer range. But, to make the call we would need more info on many impacts of giving them jets. Hopefully our leaders along with nato are making good decisions.
And even if the Russians did “win,” they’ve lost the hearts and minds, so the Russians will face a long, bloody, and costly insurgency that will embroil them until they leave.
So? Has no bearing on my point. I honestly believe you guys go to bed and dream about Trump. I really do. You think more about him now when he ISN’T president than I ever did when he was president.
Those specific words though I thought were from that conference after meeting with Putin. But you're right he basically said it several times.
Cnn live "US citizen killed in Ukraine named as James Whitney Hill, adviser to Ukraine’s interior minister says From Frederick Pleitgen and Andrew Carey in Lviv The US citizen killed in Chernihiv Thursday has been named as James Whitney Hill, born June 27, 1954, in Minnesota. The name was provided to CNN by Anton Gerashchenko, an adviser to Ukraine’s Interior Minister. Hill was among several people killed when Russian artillery opened fire on civilians in the city, according to city officials."
Cnn live "US House passes bill that suspends normal trade relations with Russia and Belarus From CNN's Clare Foran and Kristin Wilson The US House just passed a bill that suspends normal trade relations with Russia and Belarus — the latest effort by US lawmakers to inflict economic pain on Russia for its unprovoked and brutal invasion of Ukraine The final vote was 424-8 with strong bipartisan support for the legislation, which will next head to the Senate. Republicans Chip Roy of Texas, Tom Massie of Kentucky, Lauren Boebert of Colorado, Andy Biggs of Arizona, Matt Gaetz of Florida, Dan Bishop of North Carolina, Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, and Glenn Grothman of Wisconsin voted against the bill. "
Lots of us thought Putin was both intelligent and patient a few years ago. He has since forcibly removed the scales from my eyes.
I agree that as far as execution of war is concerned Trump's opinion regarding Putin is irrelevant. That being said his praise of Putin as the war was beginning still says a lot of Trump and his fitness to resume the office in the future.
That was in reference to Putin’s move of recognizing breakaway republics from Ukraine and sending in “peace keepers,” and I thought that was smart, too, in a low cunning sort of way (ethics not being a consideration). I thought he had found yet another way to gobble up territory he had desired while not quite crossing that line to bring down international ire, just as he had previously in Georgia and Ukraine (2014). I think it was fewer than 48 hours later that he initiated full-scale invasion, and I changed my mind completely. But in fairness lots of us have been wrong about lots of things with respect to this campaign. For instance, even though I pointed out on Day 1 that Russia has done historically poor at the beginning of offensive campaigns, I am still very surprised at how poorly their conventional forces have performed, particularly with respect to the complex combined-arms operations, such as the air assaults. More surprising to me has been the Russian failure to adapt tactics to the realities clearly unplanned for. It goes against all of the intelligence estimates I have seen on Russia in the last 10 years or so.
I was confused by this also. I am unaware of any path Russian troops could take near Japan to get to Ukraine. Having said that I may have misread the article. All Russian attempts suck. All Russians need to go home or die.
