War in Ukraine

Of course it does. Perhaps you forgot about water boarding and the war on terrorists?

 

For starters, I never mentioned the US in this discussion. There have certainly been examples of problematic actions by our leadership.
That said, that was action against combatants for military use. We are discussing non combatants

 

Were you outspoken against the Iraq war? Very few Republicans were (almost none), so this is a helluva spin on your part.

It’s one thing to be “anti-war”, to be a pacificist. I wonder how much of the right wing fringe carrying Putin’s water now were pro-torture and pro “freedom fry”. These are far from virtuous positions.

 

I think by March Ukraine will be a defeated. Winter is coming and with it probably defeat. The problem for us is that Russia will lick their wounds for a few years, and the decide Poland or another NATO country needs to be brought back into the fold. It's at that time our hands are tied and WWIII starts.

 

This is such a crappy situation on all sides.

 

There is basically no chance of this timeline, (I guess) unless Putin just turns parts of Ukraine into a flooded out nuclear wasteland and calls that “victory”. Russia’s military is not even on the offensive, the invasion failed. They will not be able to progress forward through the winter, nor the early spring due to mud. So how the heck do they “win” without being able to occupy the country?

I could see Putin not accepting defeat, and after terrorizing Ukraine for the next 6+ months attempting a second wave of the invasion. This may even be inevitable given Putin’s mindset. But their own military is depleted, so I see no reason to assume their “second wave” will be any more effective than the first given the status quo. Unfortunately, Putin may be betting on the the support of Ukraine faltering, with some of his “assets” in the west working hard to undermine that support.

 

Poland

 

"Mr. Putin is obsessed by the Russian gene, which he labels “special” and “endangered.”

Kinda sounds like Bibi and Isreal's excuse for not helping Ukraine's defense against Putin. Israel believes Putin when he said that Ukraine was an anti-semitic center of hate which precipitated the invasion.

Typical Isreal, who cries and cries to the world whenever things don't go their way, yet when another country faces the same fascism that the jews endured, they do nothing to help said country.
Eternal hypocrites.

 

Back to the actual war

Ukraine Update: Russia claims Ukraine will detonate 'dirty bomb' in weirdest false flag effort yet
Looks like that bakmut offensive isn’t working out for Russia despite their weird desperation for it.

Ukraine update: In Kherson 'organized withdrawal of troops of the first line is impossible'
good write up on Kherson situation.

Honestly other than blowing up civilian infrastructure not a lot of good news for Russia right now.

 

Israel did not want to piss off Russia while Russia was keeping a lid on factions in Syria hostile to Israel. They changed their minds recently, in part because Iran has joined the fight on Russia's side. I'm sure the U.S. was also in their ear about supporting Ukraine.

Israel is not stupid--they know how to recognize Nazis.

 

I think there is a better chance of Russia being defeated by springtime, as long as Ukraine doesn't run out of ammo. Maybe summer at the latest.

 

a) Do you have any examples of the U.S. "ravaging a peaceful people"? You make it sound like the U.S. invades countries that don't have any weapons. I have to be honest, that makes you sound ignorant.

b) Why would the U.S. have held elections in Iraq if it was just going to set up a puppet government, comrade? Russia is probably the global expert at setting up puppet governments in satellite countries. They must have had close to a dozen of them going at the same time a few decades ago.

 

Hopefully they are supplied with food already and have got enough fuel and wood to make it. It would be hard in the winter to resupply them.

 

Was not the discussion about the Geneva convention or did I miss something here? There's no such thing as the Geneva convention when it comes to war. I also made it clear that lining up armies and letting them duke it out went by the way side in WW I and WW II. You think the allies or the Germans cared about the people in every town they bombed or burned? Iraq was no different when it came to shock and awe. All of this was sanctioned at the highest levels of government.

 

Sorry, you posted something from "revolutionarycommunist.org" talking about how horrible Ukraine is and why we shouldn't support their "kleptocracy." Post 9138.

And what would your "global solution" look like, specifically? The complete annexation of Ukraine?

And we aren't trying to invade a country. And none of those other countries are currently invading and trying to annex other countries. Nor have we dramatically limited our own resources in case they do, as we have just sent them some weapons and money. None of which forbids the possibility of doing so again in the future if one of those countries makes the ill-advised decision to put themselves in the type of quagmire that Russia is dealing with now, as people laugh at the ineffectiveness of their military to pacify a much smaller country.

 

Which is precisely why we should deal with them now, while they are reeling. I understand, of course, we won’t do that, because the American way is never to deal with problems until they kick our teeth in first.

 

And yet again, you conflate heat of the moment and collateral damage with intentional targeting. Not to mention non battle atrocities that are encouraged or approved by leadership. Your inability to discern the differences is somewhat baffling tbh

 

There are no virtuous positions when it comes to war. A government is consigning its citizens to legally commit murder of other humans. Some will no doubt object based on a virtuous position. Mohamed Ali (formerly Cassius Clay) comes to mind. His take was I'll beat them up but I won't kill them.

After Desert Storm (a war about oil) I knew we would be back in Iraq it was just a matter of time. For the second go around the only one who had the sense to read the intelligence reports before it started was Sen. Diane Feinstein. Try as she might she couldn't get anyone to change their minds about entering that war. Democrats and Republicans alike were full went full steam ahead. You couldn't go anywhere in the US without seeing a display of American flags and stickers once it started. And where is Iraq today? Don't let the name mislead you because it certainly is not a democracy in any sense of first world democratic governments.

I wouldn't say I'm a pacifist and from the responses on this board I would be hard pressed to find a pacifist. What I have made clear is the price for Ukraine is not worth the cost in my opinion based on the fact it is all of Europe and a global trade/economy that is at stake. Until these those issues are resolved within the US and Europe then we can begin entertain intervening in wars and conflicts. As is now the gun is loaded and we are on the brink of committing suicide.

 

I stand corrected you found an article concerning a corrupt Ukraine and kleptocracy? Is the charge wrong? Perhaps this link will satisfy you. Out of 180 countries Ukraine ranks 122 and in the red zone. Corruption has increased as the years have gone by.
Corruption Perceptions Index

Resolve the economic, energy and global trade issues then we can work from a position of strength versus weakness. This is imperative.

Did we not invade Iraq and Afghanistan? The fact we didn't make them territories or annex them is why we are in the pickle we are now. People keep screaming for democratic governments but are unwilling to wipe out those that are not. If this is to be the deciding factor then by all means all other governments that do not comply should be wiped out period and taken as territories.

As for Russia's capabilities Putin has not unleashed his total arsenal on Ukraine. My reasoning for that is that he believed there would be a resolution to the conflict. The moment Nord Stream was destroyed it became apparent to Putin there would never be a diplomatic resolution to the war in Ukraine. This prompted the escalation of targeting energy infrastructures in all of Ukraine not just the contested area. To date 40% of Ukraine's energy structure is severely compromised and I suspect the next salvo will increase that percentage. This indicates to me that Ukraine with the money and arms supplied to them are not capable of putting up a solid defense.

It is also worth noting NATO, the US and allies are loathe to put boots on the ground which is what Kelensky wants and needs. NATO and Europe need the energy for their citizens not their troops. Europe's industrial sector and economy are also compromised and we are not going to get much needed help from Europe in that vein either. Relying on the US to supply all of Europe with fuel and arms is not feasible. Tanks, half tracks etc... all run on diesel not to mention a significant part of the transportation sector of the supply chain. Of course we have our own problems here the US. Replenishing what we expend on Ukraine will take years to accomplish that's not to say Russia will not be in the same boat either as two of the leading super powers go down the drain. That leaves China as the sole super power.

I can't foresee the future but if this continues any other outbreak from North Korea, China, Iran, India, Pakistan etc... will put the US in a highly compromised position. What once made the US a super power on worlds stage will no longer apply.

 

You may find it baffling yet no one goes to war leading with the Geneva convention and a solemn vow to uphold it. This is not difficult to understand.