Yes I raised the possibility of ethnic cleansing of Russian areas by Ukrainians months ago regarding the dangers of the US military getting involved directly by establishing a no-fly zone or directly engaging in combat. Sectarian conflicts aren't easy and a swift Ukrainian victory over the Donbas region might not lead to situations that we would approve of or be comfortable with. That said not doing anything with and just saying, we're tired of proxy wars, so we just let Ukraine fall is not going to be a situation that will be good for the US or make the World safer. A resurgent Russia will lead to a even larger arms race. Allowing Ukraine to fall will likely lead to Russia testing NATO resolve in the Baltic states and given they are NATO members we will be legally obliged to defend them directly leading to the war we're trying to avoid. We are walking a very thin tightrope regarding aiding the Ukrainians so they can continue to defend themselves and not getting involved directly. We're doing as much as we can while trying to avoid WWIII. That leads to the stalemate that we see. Russia can't make any serious advancements but Ukraine isn't strong enough to push Russia out and defeat the separatists. It's not ideal but this probably the best we can expect without drawing us in even more. This also gives both sides the opportunity to consider a negotiated settlement. At the moment neither side seems interested in that but they are the ones to have to decide on it.
And what do you think we should do to allow them to win? Are you for using NATO forces to establish a no fly zone? Send US and NATO forces to directly engage in combat? Give Ukraine nukes? You and others like to raise criticisms but I'm not seeing even substantial suggestions of what we should be doing.
@basso just repeats dumb stuff he reads and then mashes it up with whatever he used to do with "Command & Conquer' back in the 90's. It's how the Iraq war was won, in his mind. Like, there were a bunch of morons on twitter (and obviously, here) whining a few months back about HIMARS rockets taking forever, not realizing that shipping, supplying, and setting up maintenance, training crews - in 3 months is an unprecedented logistical achievement, according to me -- actually, wait , not me, I mean those with expert knowledge, like former MLRS Fire Direction Specialist Markos Moulitsas, -- and is why Russian ammo & fuel dumps keep mysteriously expolding for the last month and their offensive has ground to a halt.
give them ten times the artillery we already have. deploy Iron Dome or equivalent around Ukrainian cities. I would supply them with any coastal weapons they need to prevent a Russian amphibious landing near Odessa, and allow them to more effectively target the Russian BSF. I would consider deploying NATO troops to the east of the Dnieper, but well behind the front lines, as a backstop to Ukrainians. then let the UKA deploy its full resources to slugging it out to the east/south. If the Russians breakthrough, they would go no further, and NATO would guarantee Ukrainian territorial sovereignty west of the Dnieper. @SamFisher
This is a split issue for me in the sense that US involvement in this war is indeed a proxy war from our perspective. We can treat it like we did with Yemen or Syria, ship tens-hundred billions of cash and aid, with Americans here none the wiser. The Russian propping of Asaad mirrors our situation with the Ukrainians...can't use our gear in Russian soil, purely defensive purposes only. Annoying for Anti-Forever War or Anti-Globalist factions, but nothing tangible felt on the homefront. The other side is the European perspective. Russia is a tangible threat through its 15 year invasion of "buffer states". Yet it's the same EU that has become deeply interconnected with Russian resources and have signalled they're going hog wild on Winter gas futures so their people won't freeze and their industrial factories won't collapse. What's making this war urgent are those selective embargoes and Russian delays sabotage. On this thread, no one really comments about its direct impacts, yet the embargoes have distorted world markets, been a steep driver in US and global inflation (Biden wanted to blame Putin 100%, while Powell did not...), and truly reflect how crucial Russia as a resource exporter. This is causing huge strains in our relationship with Europe as Our Policy doesn't account for their localized pain. You mention NATO incursion that Poland or Lithuania might bring up, but Germany and France are more than happy to kick that can down the road as they're battling resource constraints, several PIIGS buckling from US induced inflation, and a Euro that is near or under parity with the Dollar. They are the growing faction that wants any peace ASAP, not me. Not only is Europe going through hell out of principle, Japan is burning treasuries for cash, and our strong dollar is choking the rest of the world. I'm not saying "giving up Ukraine" would solve any of those structural issues, but maintaining Ukraine focused embargoes does tip the scales against our favor.
“I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straight forward and trustworthy and we had a very good dialogue.” “I was able to get a sense of his soul.”
We just need a settlement of the Ukraine problem ASAP. Pootie poot totally seems like a gut who will know when its time to be satisfied and not grasp for more in a year or two.
Now Russia is saying regime change because they can’t get their way, I really hope Zelensky does the same, we want Russian regime change. I still think NATO will be forced to be directly involved. DD
?? It's what the guy has been saying all along. Dump the pro American regime and he will go away. Unfortunately like all politics, global no different, if you disagree with me about anything, that automatically makes you an extremist on the other side.
Now there's some suggestions. First we are giving them a lot of artillery. We can't give them 10 times what they have because of things like logistics. With Ukrainian ports under bombardment we can't bring them in by ship and neither side has air superiority to allow uninterrupted supply by air. Right now they are relying on rail and truck transport which is slow. Also we are providing them with coastal weapons and intel. That's how they've been able to sink some Russian ships. Deploying NATO troops east of the Dnipro would be putting them well into Ukrainian soil. Whether they are on the front line they are easily within range of Russian artillery. That would also be seen as a direct involvement of NATO and would invite a total war with Russia. That is exactly the tightrope that is being walked.
Our situation with Ukraine isn't like Russia with Assad. Russian forces actively fought in Syria and suffered hundreds of casaulties. True Europe depends on Russia's resources but Europe seems pretty united against Putin even Orban who is the most pro-Putin is still mostly supporting the stand against them. Most of the other NATO countries are themselves pouring money and resources into Ukraine. Most telling is that countries that long sought to stay neutral and out of NATO now want in and the rest of NATO is welcoming them. Even Turkey is agreeing to allow them in. You're arguing that this war is causing strains separating us from Europe. If anything it is bringing NATO more together.
