Thanks for providing a source, I think russia definitely takes a big hit but it is such a large superpower (similar to us), not to mention siblings with china that it still doesn't affect the outcome. I wish it did and believe me if so, I would be arguing differently.
Logistically speaking, invasion of a neighboring country (that used to be a part of the USSR <30 years prior) is not akin to invading a foreign country like Afghanistan. Supply points, strategic planning and the indigenous population wise they are completely different Guerilla warfare through an indigenous population that was completely invaded is not a good analogy even with all the holes as I mentioned above. If you want individual militias fighting from bunkers for 30+ years until Russia feels it isn't financially feasible (which again is unlikely given the population being homogenous with the above) than you aren't arguing from a position of what is best for ukraine. It also isn't a rational take or justification to ask americans to donate hundreds of billions of dollars when they're struggling to pay rent. For the record I am against financial aid to israel, ukraine and all these countries. Its not just this confluct or a political take. You have to know when to cut your losses
What if in 40 years a much stronger México decides to invade a much weaker USA? Would you be opposed to let’s say a now powerful India (who Mexico regularly attacks via cyber and wants to destabilize) arms the Americans to defend their territory against a massive Mexican military? I mean as you point out a large portion of the US used to be Mexico anyways. So in 40 years if Mexico is a superpower you are endorsing them invading the US just because they are a super power and the rest of the world at that point including a super powered India should go out of their way to not give a dime to the United States?
Would a Ukrainian insurgency successfully push out the Russians if the Russians occupy the rest of Ukraine? Maybe. I tend to think not. Some would point to Vietnam or Afghanistan as examples of successful insurgencies but more apt comparisons would be previous Ukrainian/Polish insurgencies during the time those countries were occupied by the Soviet Union. Most Poles and many Ukrainians (if not most) did not wish to be members of the Soviet Union. Insurgents group did operate and conduct insurgencies. Those did not end well. In fact, you've probably never heard of them because they were so unsuccessful. Or Republican insurgencies in Spain after the Spanish civil war and establishment of Francos regime. And then again after WWII. Also unsuccessful. Most people don't even know about these though. Also, Ukraine is basically entirely flat. It doesn't have great geography for an insurgency.
I’m not really clear what y’all are Arguing here. I don’t think there was ever any realistic view or claim that Ukraine would destroy Russia. I don’t think anyone. Was or is expecting Zelensky to have a victory parade in Moscow. This conflict and US aid from the beginning has been to prevent Russia from taking all of Ukraine, which has succeeded, with a secondary goal of trying to help Ukraine to take back territory taken by Russia and Russia. Backed separatists.
I mean the ultimate goal is to deter invasions in general of Democratic nations by dictators who have crappy countries and want to improve their standing by stealing another neighboring country. The US has direct interest in South Korea and Taiwan that would be at risk if Putin rolled through Ukraine with the US looking the other way. Of course there are ulterior motives by some in the military and the arms industry for sure but that’s not the driving force of the policy. In short it’s about our national security interests. If some folks don’t understand that it’s because they don’t want to understand it either because they think they sound cool and righteous like John Lennon or they are just going to argue against any policy about anything a Democrat supports. Either way though the Ukraine support isn’t a hard one here. It’s only hard for those who have motives and don’t want to live in reality.
Ah, yes, vague notions of "OuR NaTioNal SeCuRiTy INteRests." - People just say this and leave it at that as if it explains everything. Because, in reality, they cannot articulate what those are. The United States of America is under minimal threat by Russia or China. No Chinese soldiers or Russian soldiers will be driving a tank up any American street or step foot on United States soil in hostile action under any realistic scenario. It should not be the United States obligation to ensure that other countries in this world don't ever war with each other. Do I want to see Russia conquer Ukraine? No. Do I think its the United States or the United States tax payers job to ensure Ukrainian freedom? No, nor should it be. And I would say the same for many countries. Same with Taiwan. Do I want China to conquer Taiwan? No. Should it be the United States responsibility to make sure that doesn't happen? Also no. If you wake up tomorrow and Russia controls Ukraine will that suck? Yes. Will it disrupt markets? Maybe. Will Markets adjust? Definitely. Will you, an average American citizen, be secure in your persons and go about your life just fine? Yes. The real national security threat is the United States 34 trillion dollar debt, largely propelled by the MIC, which, currently eats up $900 billion a year, many multiples the next largest military, for a country not at war. The interest alone eats up about 15% of the national budget and is only growing. Tick-tock-tick-tock. But congratulations to you if you've fallen for the MIC propaganda and think "but RusSia" or "but ChiNA" - Like, what do you think these countries are going to do to you? Get a grip.
US has agreed to defend NATO. The Russian threat to NATO is real. Just this week, Russia threatened Finland, which we must also consider a threat to the US. Ukraine obviously is not in NATO, but shares a border with three NATO countries: Slovakia, Hungary, and Romania. NATO countries are very concerned about Russia occupying Ukraine and by extension so is the US.
Russia borders several NATO signatories right now. The calculus doesn't change if it borders three more tomorrow.
It's pretty easy to define US national security interests. A world largely at peace is better for US security than one that has warring powers. You'd think we'd have learned this lesson after a pair of world wars. The US economy, quality of life, and lives of its soldiers have dramatically benefitted by a peaceful world order. The idea that regional conflicts don't have global impacts is very 1800's-ish. It's the whole "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" concept. If you don't stop things when they small, they become much bigger problems down the line. And the entire history of the world tells us that aggressor nations don't stop being aggressors unless someone stops it. Russia is not going to magically stop at Ukraine.
Nothing vague about.... Russia and China are gobbling up the world's resources..... Why do you think they are focusing so much on Africa? South America? Increasingly Central America? Ukraine is a major breadbasket, logistical hub, and has lots of resources. US vs USSR was ideological but also about strategic resources. The USSR stretched from parts of the middle east to central Asia and controlled vast amounts of oil and gas. I view your point as very simplistic..... and no where did you mention SSN and Medicare (aka an aging population) taking up a very large share of the US deficit. Nations fighting over resources is old as mankind..... Get a clue.
It does if Putin thinks he got away with rape, human trafficking, and genocide at NATO's borders. Putin sabotaged our elections (DNC/Hilary hacks leaked via WikiLeaks), interfered with our efforts in Syria and middle east, and worked with OPEC to tank our fracking companies at the onset of covid He's not some harmless stooge. He cripples us then we cripple him twice until he cries uncle. Street rules is the only language he listens.
The problem with this view is that it was tried before and didn’t work out well In the 1930’s. The world since then is far more connected than it was then. If the PRC were to invade Taiwan it would definitely affect US consumers. If people were upset about inflation and supply chains before that will be nothing if a war breaks out in Asia between the world’s second largest economy and the Worlds leading supplier of advanced microchips. A war that will shut down major trade routes and drag in several other major Economies.
It is wrong to have led Ukraine down the primrose path to fight a war they could not win just for the possibility of joining NATO. Putin violated international law for sure, but when has that stopped us? I know many of you sincerely have swallowed the latest version of the domino theory or believe that Putin is the new Hitler and wishes to conquer at the minimum all of Eastern Europe. It was wrong to tell Ukraine not to end the war after the first month when they could have avoided losing more territory and a couple of hundred of thousand casualties. Just evil for our neo-cons to have viewed it as just a nice way to bleed Russia without losing American lives.
Hey ,Judoka would you be up for a major war with China in which the US sends troops naval carrier groups -- just about everything except nukes, to prevent Taiwan becoming part of China again?
I wish I could do an in thread poll, but it would be educational to understand who you hate the most: *America *Putin *Hamas *Jews and why.
No one led Ukraine down a primrose path to war with Russia. You perhaps deliberately forget that it was Russia that invaded Ukraine.
I would be for exactly what we’re doing in Ukraine, arming them to fight off the PRC. That said yes if the PRC were to invade Taiwan it might escalate to full in war with US naval forces engaged. I’ll admit I am biased here as I have family in Taiwan so yes I would be for the defense of Taiwan in that case. As is what is happening Ukraine right now is giving the PRC much to think about considering an invasion of Taiwan would be much harder than Russia invading Ukraine.
I’m also going to note it’s interesting to see How many who claim to be for social Justice and protecting the weak from exploitation of the strong are so willing to accept the invasion of a smaller country to authoritarian regimes.
