Europe under extreme duress

[JTS11]

Interesting article that raises more questions about the need for continued financial aid to Ukraine. The current administration (and their supportive talking heads in the media) certainly give unwavering support for seemingly never ending aid for Zelensky. Interested in your thoughts, and no, not the WE MUST DEFEAT PUTIN OVER THERE !!! ones.

I pretty much stopped reading after the author blamed the US "Deep state" for the 2014 Maidan revolution in UKR that chased Yanukovych out of power, and that Biden's dirty hands were behind it. Also, the author points to BS RUS administered referenda as evidence that UKR residents in Crimea and the Donbas preferred to be annexed.

This is rank Russian propaganda that has taken hold on a significant portion of the far-right isolationist wing of the GOP. Their shot-caller Tucker "Lord Haw-Haw" Carlson just declared that Moscow is nicer than any American big city. 😕

 

[sevenhelmet]

I pretty much stopped reading after the author blamed the US "Deep state" for the 2014 Maidan revolution in UKR that chased Yanukovych out of power, and that Biden's dirty hands were behind it. Also, the author points to BS RUS administered referenda as evidence that UKR residents in Crimea and the Donbas preferred to be annexed.

This is rank Russian propaganda that has taken hold on a significant portion of the far-right isolationist wing of the GOP. Their shot-caller Tucker "Lord Haw-Haw" Carlson just declared that Moscow is nicer than any American big city. 😕

More proof that politics is a horseshoe. Portions of the far right are now de facto pro-communist. Both "sides" are authoritarian.

Ugh.

 

[Flash]

Interesting article that raises more questions about the need for continued financial aid to Ukraine. The current administration (and their supportive talking heads in the media) certainly give unwavering support for seemingly never ending aid for Zelensky. Interested in your thoughts, and no, not the WE MUST DEFEAT PUTIN OVER THERE !!! ones.

...In a broad sweep response, I agree that a solution is at the negotiating table (as with all wars) but I’m not sure how much trust I would place in Putin…but then again…geopolitics...Ukrainian freedom must be ensured by much more than a Putin-backed treaty.

Accepting the article's premises that the war must end with negotiations, you ALWAYS want to enter negotiations from a position of strength, not weakness. Strength in this case means Russia sees an unending stream of support for Ukraine. That brings them to the table sooner, not later. That saves lives.

A negotiated settlement is the likely outcome of the war but as has already been pointed out, what are the conditions Putin will demand to end the war and can he be trusted? Part of the problem is that Putin does not appear to be the stable and rational actor he supposedly was, so even if Ukraine makes a 'good faith' effort to negotiate the response may not be met in 'good faith' like demands for the permanent ceding of significant parts of Ukraine, to include parts not currently occupied, and the replacement of the current democratically elected government of Ukraine.

Cede too much and you are blatantly rewarding naked aggression and encouraging not only Putin but other countries to do the same. In that case, look out Taiwan.

Your second citation is full of blatant falsehoods, with us never promising verbally or in writing not to expand NATO along with several other pieces of Russian propaganda. The countries that joined NATO after the end of the Cold War did so, and continue to do so, have done so of their own free will and with very widespread public support. More than a few of them having been repeatedly invaded by Russia unprovoked, even within the last 100 years. Russia has proven their fears by attacking a sovereign, democratic neighbor merely to conquer territory that Putin thinks is his.

 

[taxi1]

Portions of the far right are now de facto pro-communist.

I'm picturing them showing up at the same meeting, saying, "What the fu...."

 

[Flash]

More proof that politics is a horseshoe. Portions of the far right are now de facto pro-communist. Both "sides" are authoritarian.

I'm picturing them showing up at the same meeting, saying, "What the fu...."

The example I always use is a classmate from college, was a huge Bernie Bro in 2016 and 2020 then went off the cliff after that posting everything from some pretty blatant Russian propaganda (he loves him some Putin) to wild COVID conspiracy theories with a few chemtrail posts thrown in every now and then.

 

[robav8r]

Opinions of whether funding should continue aside, I find it interesting that there is very little talk (publicly) about short and long term, results-based decision making, and battlefield analysis, both short & long term on both sides. The narrative just seems to be “keep writing the checks, money is the only weapon that will defeat Putin.” Where is the in-depth analysis and discussion about what an eng-game looks like?

 

[sevenhelmet]

Opinions of whether funding should continue aside, I find it interesting that there is very little talk (publicly) about short and long term, results-based decision making, and battlefield analysis, both short & long term on both sides. The narrative just seems to be “keep writing the checks, money is the only weapon that will defeat Putin.” Where is the in-depth analysis and discussion about what an eng-game looks like?

I think the general idea is something along the lines of keeping Putin in a quagmire for as long as possible, without saying we're keeping Putin in a quagmire for as long as possible.

 

[Uncle Fester]

Opinions of whether funding should continue aside, I find it interesting that there is very little talk (publicly) about short and long term, results-based decision making, and battlefield analysis, both short & long term on both sides. The narrative just seems to be “keep writing the checks, money is the only weapon that will defeat Putin.” Where is the in-depth analysis and discussion about what an eng-game looks like?

SIPR and higher. Not sure where you're working these days, but in the big building adjacent to Arlington almost everyone is deeply interested in what's going on along the Dnipro line and figuring out what happens next.

 

[Mirage]

SIPR and higher. Not sure where you're working these days, but in the big building adjacent to Arlington almost everyone is deeply interested in what's going on along the Dnipro line and figuring out what happens next.

Is this not something that the voting public should be apart of (aside from the secret stuff of course)? Our politicians are off passing bills to borrow hundreds of billions from our children to send abroad... Seems like they should be justifying those actions with more than, "we've got to stop Putin!" Especially if they don't want public support to erode, as is the common fear.

I'd like to think they're making these decisions with an end game in mind. Iraq and Afghanistan taught me that they most likely do not. Just keep sending money, because if you don't, you're a *insert slur here*!

 

[Uncle Fester]

Is this not something that the voting public should be apart of (aside from the secret stuff of course)? Our politicians are off passing bills to borrow hundreds of billions from our children to send abroad... Seems like they should be justifying those actions with more than, "we've got to stop Putin!" Especially if they don't want public support to erode, as is the common fear.

I'd like to think they're making these decisions with an end game in mind. Iraq and Afghanistan taught me that they most likely do not. Just keep sending money, because if you don't, you're a *insert slur here*!

The vast majority of the money being appropriated in the Ukraine foreign aid bills and related actions stays in the US. That money is going to the US DIB (or whatever we’re supposed to call it now) to replace what’s being taken out of war stocks and sent forward. Most of the rest is going to NATO countries to replace what’s coming out of *their* war stocks. Very little US taxpayer cash money actually goes to the Ukrainians directly.

The active military needs to be extremely cautious about trying to influence public opinion when it comes to foreign policy, That should stay within the purview of elected officials and direct civilian appointees. For what it’s worth, I can say that since even before the Russian invasion began, the admin has been extraordinarily aggressive about declassifying intel for public release, and when I was on the watchfloor in NMCC in 2022, what we saw in open source matched what was being reported only a few days earlier.

The overall message has been pretty consistent - halt Russian aggression in Ukraine because it’s in the US and NATO’s best long-term interests to do so. Putin has been explicit about his belief that virtually all former Russian/Soviet territory, and all Russian-speaking peoples, ultimately should be part of Russia. There’s no reason not to believe him. There’s also the matter that Xi is closely watching the response to Ukraine and weighing the Western appetite for countering aggressive moves against neighbors. Deterrence works, but only if you show you‘re willing to back up your words when it counts.

That said: we don’t control the endgame In Ukraine. Expecting the Ukrainians - who have been defending their own homes and punching well above their weight while doing so - to give up and surrender a chunk of their country whenever some other country decides it’s time is not reasonable, and undermines our credibility with other nations in the future.

 

[Brett327]

WE MUST DEFEAT PUTIN OVER THERE !!!

Why is this an insufficient argument for you? After Putin’s recent rant about Poland, I’m having trouble understanding why continuing to apply significant costs to NATO’s primary adversary isn’t at the top of your national security priorities.

 

[robav8r]

Why is this an insufficient argument for you? After Putin’s recent rant about Poland, I’m having trouble understanding why continuing to apply significant costs to NATO’s primary adversary isn’t at the top of your national security priorities.

Because as someone who is a taxpayer and has worn the cloth of our nation for most of my adult life, I’d like a few more details about where the money is going, and has gone, and will go and how all of that folds into ours and NATOs strategy.

 

[robav8r]

The vast majority of the money being appropriated in the Ukraine foreign aid bills and related actions stays in the US. That money is going to the US DIB (or whatever we’re supposed to call it now) to replace what’s being taken out of war stocks and sent forward. Most of the rest is going to NATO countries to replace what’s coming out of *their* war stocks. Very little US taxpayer cash money actually goes to the Ukrainians directly.

The active military needs to be extremely cautious about trying to influence public opinion when it comes to foreign policy, That should stay within the purview of elected officials and direct civilian appointees. For what it’s worth, I can say that since even before the Russian invasion began, the admin has been extraordinarily aggressive about declassifying intel for public release, and when I was on the watchfloor in NMCC in 2022, what we saw in open source matched what was being reported only a few days earlier.

The overall message has been pretty consistent - halt Russian aggression in Ukraine because it’s in the US and NATO’s best long-term interests to do so. Putin has been explicit about his belief that virtually all former Russian/Soviet territory, and all Russian-speaking peoples, ultimately should be part of Russia. There’s no reason not to believe him. There’s also the matter that Xi is closely watching the response to Ukraine and weighing the Western appetite for countering aggressive moves against neighbors. Deterrence works, but only if you show you‘re willing to back up your words when it counts.

That said: we don’t control the endgame In Ukraine. Expecting the Ukrainians - who have been defending their own homes and punching well above their weight while doing so - to give up and surrender a chunk of their country whenever some other country decides it’s time is not reasonable, and undermines our credibility with other nations in the future.

Good response, thank you.

 

[robav8r]

SIPR and higher. Not sure where you're working these days, but in the big building adjacent to Arlington almost everyone is deeply interested in what's going on along the Dnipro line and figuring out what happens next

SIPR and higher. Not sure where you're working these days, but in the big building adjacent to Arlington almost everyone is deeply interested in what's going on along the Dnipro line and figuring out what happens next.

Understand the info on SNET/TNET, was asking more along the lines of the strategic messaging by the administration about the 5Ws of the funding requests. I understand the stop Putin in his tracks messaging, but find the way in which it’s being messaged and used for justification for increased funding to the public very poor.

 

[WhiskeySierra6]

The vast majority of the money being appropriated in the Ukraine foreign aid bills and related actions stays in the US.

I think the fact that this isn't "All of the money..." is a big sticking point for a lot of people. The article below is a little dated (Sep 2023) but some of the expenditures raise some eyebrows.

In Ukraine, U.S. tax dollars are funding more than just military aid

America has provided more than $70 billion in aid to Ukraine. The money has not just gone to the military, but also to help farmers, small businesses and first responders.

www.cbsnews.com

Things I don't personally think further the national security interests of the US:

1. "The U.S. government is subsidizing small businesses in Ukraine..."

2. "The U.S. government has also bought seeds and fertilizer for Ukrainian farmers."

3. "America is covering the salaries of Ukraine's first responders, all 57,000 of them."

4. "The U.S. funds divers who clear unexploded ammunition from the country's rivers to make them safe again for swimming and fishing."

Combine stuff like this with a historically corrupt government (also discussed in the article) and a myriad of domestic issues that could be solved by this money, and it's not hard to see where the growing national fatigue is coming from.