Europe under extreme duress

[sevenhelmet]

Well so be it. Convince me otherwise. The snail pace of us being "halfway in" doesnt seem to be netting any benefit for us as a country. Is there a long term strategy? Have our political leaders made a case with a stated end game? Will this be another forever war? I vote - I have agency.

I've read plenty of Eastern European literature in college - Jerzy Kosinski.

If the virtue of a long struggle was self evident - well, it would be self evident. What is the end game here? How much is enough?

Rhetorically - why isnt every flyable early block F-16 and F-18 being regen out of Davis Monthan/AMARC and being sent UKR via Poland?

Since you seem to have been taken in by certain pundits’ talking points, none of this is actually likely to convince you, Chuck, but here goes:

Are you actually suggesting that we abandon yet another ally and allow a bully dictator to illegally seize another (democratic) country’s land? Your plan is to reward the bully?

A “forever war” weakens Russia, and by extension, its allies. That’s good for us, particularly since no US troops are being sent to fight.

“Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake”

Immediate escalation from our side invites retaliation from an irrational nuclear state. That sound like fun? The best solution for us is a gradual war of attrition, with defensive assistance to Ukraine. The ideal outcome is Russia going home weakened and not having made any territorial gains. Strap in and find a good book to read. It’s going to be a while.

As others have pointed out, for less than the cost of yet another bureaucratized failure in military acquisitions, we can use up some old weapons, roll back a repressive communist dictator (maybe two; I’d like to see Lukashenko buried at the bottom of a deep coal mine right next to Putin), and keep our military industrial base chugging along.

All while (and so) you can continue to enjoy your standard of living and listening to whomever has put these craven ideas in your head.

 

[JTS11]

What the fuck are you talking about? Are you completely insane? I'm kind of baffled at the depths of your stupidity right now. Who put these absurd ideas in your brain?

I'll say it. It's the horseshoe effect. Either Tucker Carlson or RFK Jr. The populist right and left have indistinguishable views on a lot things now..

 

[robav8r]

I listened to this last night and was intrigued by what Colonel Macgregor had to say. And don't turn this into a "Tucker is all fucked up" diatribe, just genuinely curious about what you think about what the Colonel said . . .

 

[JTS11]

I listened to this last night and was intrigued by what Colonel Macgregor had to say. And don't turn this into a "Tucker is all fucked up" diatribe, just genuinely curious about what you think about what the Colonel said . . .

Please do some research on why the good Col and Tucker are and were featured prominently on Russian state media. His claims of Ukrainian losses are ridiculous.

 

[jollygreen07]

No one can convince me that the moderators aren’t goading Chuck into saying some of this stuff. He is single-handedly keeping the non-wannabe side of this website alive ?

 

[robav8r]

Please do some research on why the good Col and Tucker are and were featured prominently on Russian state media. His claims of Ukrainian losses are ridiculous.

Easy Tiger - are all of the Colonels comments dismissed by you? I don't want to get into a food fight here, but he talks at length about the state of The Russian military/economy/war effort and ours . . . . .

 

[JTS11]

Easy Tiger - are all of the Colonels comments dismissed by you? I don't want to get into a food fight here, but he talks at length about the state of The Russian military/economy/war effort and ours . . . . .

Rob, this dude is an outlier. You could probably talk to 10,000 retired 0-6's and not get this level of regurgitation of Russian talking points. Not sure what his angle is, but he is way outside of the mainstream.

I dare you to listen to this whole clip from some rando who is promoting crypto, and say he's on the level.

I mean this is a report from TASS, and it's revolting.

US was turning Ukraine into base for strikes on Russia â former US military adviser

"The Russians has finally felt compelled to intervene and they have," Douglas Macgregor added

tass.com

 

[taxi1]

“Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake”

Amen

Degrading Russia in its current state, the country with a whole lot of nukes pointed at us, is A Good Thing.

 

[Mirage]

I don't understand your point. It seems you are saying that either we start trucking jets in from Poland, or just cut bait and run. IMHO, this would embolden bad actors around the world and threaten the rules based world order. It would signal to them that we are only reliable until demagogues abuse our 2 yr domestic political cycle to sway public opinion. That's what Putin is counting on...For the Wesr to get 'bored'..

I think the debate should be between the status quo of what we and our allies are doing now, and what additional capabilities we can provide them IOT defeat this genocidal invasion of a democratic country that is seeking to join the West.

It may be a bit of a slog. but Russia has already lost. Cutting Ukraine off now would be unconscionable.

The aid we are providing is pennies on the dollar of our annual defense budget. The Russian military is getting wrecked. Pretty good return on investment, if you ask me. Also, the accesion of Finland and Sweden to NATO is 'chef's kiss'.

Genocidal? Rules based order?

Genocide is what has happened in China and Africa repeatedly over the last 2 decades and we did nothing. What did that do for the "rules based world order" that ideologues love to use as justification instead of actual logic? Here's the rule that runs the world: all politics is local.

Amen

Degrading Russia in its current state, the country with a whole lot of nukes pointed at us, is A Good Thing.

Maybe. Or maybe the current regime there ultimately collapses and it becomes a failed state with a bunch of nukes pointed... who knows where... and our money paved the way towards that catastrophy. "It is difficult to make predictions, especially about the future." Which is one reason why our government's actions, more often than not, do not result in the desired outcomes.

 

[taxi1]

Maybe. Or maybe the current regime there ultimately collapses and it becomes a failed state with a bunch of nukes pointed... who knows where... and our money paved the way towards that catastrophe. "It is difficult to make predictions, especially about the future." Which is one reason why our government's actions, more often than not, do not result in the desired outcomes.

What do you think the outcome will be if we let Ukraine swing in the breeze?

 

[Mirage]

What do you think the outcome will be if we let Ukraine swing in the breeze?

"It is difficult to make predictions, especially about the future."

That said, my best guess is the outcome would be: Ukraine gets all the support it needs from it's European neighbors to stay a sovereign country, while the chances of escalation involving the loss of US lives decrease. I've detailed my thoughts in great detail many times already, not going to go deeper again.

 

[JTS11]

Genocidal? Rules based order?

Genocide is what has happened in China and Africa repeatedly over the last 2 decades and we did nothing. What did that do for the "rules based world order" that ideologues love to use as justification instead of actual logic? Here's the rule that runs the world: all politics is local.

I'm not clear on what you're saying. Since WW2, it's been in our national interest to promote a rules based world order. Do you not agree? It's hardly the opinion of an ideologue. What's your logic for not wanting to prevent a strategic rival from taking over a democratic country by force and thus threatening other NATO allies? Again, what we're providing is peanuts compared to the annual defense budget, and probably getting way more bang for the buck than the peacetime shit it gets spent on.

Are there examples of genocides elsewhere? Sure. I believe we've tried to use instruments of our national power to the degree we could. It's not like we could provide HIMARS and Javelins to the Uyghurs in China. In Ukraine, we can and should.

 

[Random8145]

I wouldn't trust much of anything Colonel MacGregor says. He has been saying since the start of the war that Ukraine was going to fold. And it keeps not folding and so he keeps moving the goalposts. When you keep being as consistently wrong as he is, it rather largely dings your credibility when you try to act as if you are some authority on how the war is really going for Ukraine and for Russia. He also has claimed that Ukrainians are indistinguishable from Russians, which is a classic Russian claim, and that Putin should be permitted to take Ukraine.

On paper, he has very impressive credentials (graduate of West Point, Ph.D in International Relations, led a tank force in combat in the Gulf War, etc...) but in practice, he seems to not have a clue what he's talking about.

As for the political Right, it unfortunately has gone whacko on this issue. My take on it is that this is for multiple reasons: due to Ukraine being viewed as responsible for certain of Trump's troubles, to many on the Right, Ukraine = Bad. At the same time, due to the hunger on the Right for strong, pro-American leadership, many came to admire Putin for his unabashedly being pro- Russia and seemingly not caring what anyone thinks about it. He also was viewed as being not that bad of a guy. Yes, he might have you killed for criticizing him, but hey given the environment he operates in and was brought up in, that is understandable. He isn't a Stalin or a Hitler. And also, exhaustion over Iraq and Afghanistan, and many feeling betrayed by the establishment GOP and Bush administration people, who they very solidly supported during the major Iraq and Afghanistan War years, only then for these same people to turn around and, in their view, completely demonize them over their support of Trump and actively try to destroy Trump.

Thus, now many of these people thus view Ukraine as at best no better than Russia and the whole thing a waste for the greedy Military-Industrial-Warmonger complex of Big Washington to use as yet another forever war to spend (waste) billions to a few trillion of our taxpayer dollars that could be much better spent here and to deter China. They also believe our own behavior caused this (by "expanding NATO eastwards," which IMO is a major oversimplification)

I understand their feelings about feeling betrayed over Iraq and Afghanistan, but this is a really legitimate military effort, and one not requiring our own military to be directly involved.

 

[Random8145]

Let me express my view in August 2023 as an active participant in the Americam electorate. I am losing patience with Ukraine. I am losing patience with the lack of strategic progress on the part of Ukraine. This war has devolved into a transactional infrantry and artillary battle with zero progress by Ukraine. Its banal, noise, boring, and quicly becoming unworthy of my support as a voter.

Just my opinion, but IMO people are too spoiled by modern times with our shorter (conventional) wars. If it isn't over in six months, they're wanting to throw in the towel. We are a year and a half in. Ukraine started with a very limited military, while Russia started with a much bigger one.

To me, this war looks sort of like a mini-me of the German-led Axis vs the Russian-led Soviet Union in World War II. Initially, Germany had the upper hand as the Soviet military was devastated. But gradually the Soviets became more supplied, developed their military industry more, and learned the lessons, and gradually turned things around. The U.S., in terms of Lend-Lease, also took a few years to really scale things up into high-gear. While obviously not an exact comparison, this war seems similar in some ways. Ukraine is learning the lessons of how to fight most effectively and getting more equipment and developing their military industry more. Russia is getting more and more worn down, and the U.S. is gradually scaling up production of the artillery shells needed and training Ukraine on the fighter planes needed.

Also right now is very slow going because they have to first push through all the thousands of mines, tank ditches, and other obstacles and traps the Russians laid out for them and they must try to do so without adequate air power. But hopefully that will come in time.

 

[Mirage]

I'm not clear on what you're saying. Since WW2, it's been in our national interest to promote a rules based world order. Do you not agree? It's hardly the opinion of an ideologue. What's your logic for not wanting to prevent a strategic rival from taking over a democratic country by force and thus threatening other NATO allies? Again, what we're providing is peanuts compared to the annual defense budget, and probably getting way more bang for the buck than the peacetime shit it gets spent on.

Are there examples of genocides elsewhere? Sure. I believe we've tried to use instruments of our national power to the degree we could. It's not like we could provide HIMARS and Javelins to the Uyghurs in China. In Ukraine, we can and should.

My views on Ukraine are well documented in this thread. If you missed them, go back a few pages or search the thread.

My point in my reply to you is that we do not consistently support a supposed "rules based world order" in the way one must for it to be sustained. You can't willy nilly choose when to uphold the rules or not and expect the bad actors to then always respect the rules. China knows full well they can do whatever they want to the Uyghurs, and we won't do shit. They know attacking Taiwan is different, not because of a "rules based world order", but because we have made it very clear.

Here's a fun exercise. Take a look at all the countries currently led by leaders of coup's. What do they have in common? They're countries our general public don't care much about, unlike, say, Ukraine. Imagine if there were a coup in a European country. You'd be on here saying how it's our duty to uphold the "rules based world order" to prevent a coup in a democratic country. Apparently, it's only a rule that you can't overthrow a democracy with force if it's a European country.

Or perhaps, actual political decisions aren't based in upholding a "rules based world order", but based on individual cases and the local politics involved that pressure leaders to make certain decisions.