I don't understand. What security pact would the US and UK make without insisting that France and Germany also be involved?
Joining NATO will take time, and the US and the UK have both talked about interim security arrangements during the NATO debate period so Russia doesn't do stupid things. 3 days ago, the UK agreed to a deal already. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-61408700 UK agrees mutual security deals with Finland and Sweden The UK has agreed mutual security pacts with Sweden and Finland, agreeing to come to their aid should either nation come under attack. UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson visited both countries to sign the deals, amid debate about them joining Nato. The pacts also state that Finland and Sweden would assist the UK in a crisis. Mr Johnson and Swedish PM Magdalena Andersson said co-operation was "even more important" given Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The second deal was announced in a joint press conference with Finnish President Sauli Niinistö. Mr Johnson said the "solemn declaration" between the UK and Finland was reflective of the "extreme difficulty of the times we are in".
Says the arrogant, routinely wrong, self aggrandizing know-it-all who went all in predicting Brexit would fail and that Elon Musk's bid to buy twitter had also failed and was over. It is safe to say that you do not know jack squat and whatever you say or predict, something close to the opposite of that is much more likely to occur or be the case. And that is again the situation here with regards to pretty much everything you spoke to in your quote above.
The Democrats and a number of Republican establishment types are clearly eager to go to war with Russia, for the apparent purpose of regime change in Russia. Currently, they are actively funding and working to escalate a proxy war with Russia using the Ukrainians as canon fodder. But that appears just to be the appetizer, with the main course shaping up to be a direct conflict between NATO and Russia. In fact, Democrat Majority Leader Steny Hoyer insists that war is already underway, and that we are actually at war at the current time. This is insanely misguided and epically foolish. "It is unfortunate that in a time of war, that we spend all the time blaming our own president. It is unfortunate that when the Europeans put themselves over the objections of numerous administrations in a place where they had a dependence on Russia, Russia has no leverage over us." "I wish we'd get off this and really focus on the enemy. I know there's a lot of politics here, but we're at war. We need to produce energy." Fact Check: The U.S. is not at war with Russia. GOP Rep. Matt Gaetz replied:
She acts as if Ukranians really have a choice in all of this. I feel for them dying and fighting for their nation, but that doesn't mean anything when your neighbor is a big nuclear power. I seriously hope this war still isn't going on by next year.
Britain says Russia has lost a third of its forces in Ukraine LONDON, May 15 (Reuters) - Russia has probably lost around a third of the ground forces it deployed to Ukraine and its offensive in the Donbas region "has lost momentum and fallen significantly behind schedule", British military intelligence said on Sunday. "Despite small-scale initial advances, Russia has failed to achieve substantial territorial gains over the past month whilst sustaining consistently high levels of attrition," the British defence ministry said on Twitter. "Russia has now likely suffered losses of one third of the ground combat force it committed in February." It said Russia was unlikely to dramatically accelerate its rate of advance over the next 30 days.
First, one can not rule out an all or nothing attack by Russia. Putin's face and the Russian Army's reputation are on the line. Second, the Russian Army now has a track record in Ukraine. Both their readiness and abilities are in question. There is a significant chance that an all out attack would not work.
Downed Russian Fighters Said to Be Found With Basic GPS 'Taped To the Dashboards' Wrecked Russian fighter jets are being found with rudimentary GPS receivers "taped to the dashboards" in Ukraine because their inbuilt navigation systems are so bad, the UK's defense secretary, Ben Wallace, said.... "[W]hilst Russia has large amounts of artillery and armor that they like parading, they are unable to leverage them for combined arms maneuver and just resort to mass indiscriminate barrages," he added.... Last month, Ukrainian troops paraded what they said was a Russian drone that had been covered in duct tape and fitted with a generic plastic bottle top for a fuel cap. In March, Ukrainian troops found what appeared to be Russian army bandages dating to 1978 discarded on a battlefield. In his Monday speech, Wallace said Russian vehicles "are frequently found with 1980s paper maps of Ukraine in them" and that soldiers were using "pine logs as makeshift protection on logistical trucks" and attaching "overhead 'cope cages' to their tanks."
There are multiple GNSS systems out there, all susceptible to spoofing and jamming except for the latest gen GNSS. This is actually a really big deal in SIGINT. 'GPS' is the wests version of GNSS, so ya, having a GPS unit taped to a 'dashboard' to ensure Russian GLONASS matches GPS would not be surprising at all.
I mean, i know this might need some understanding of a time before the last 2 months But the reasons why France and Germany won't let themselves be drawn into a conflict with Russia over some satellite state is a lesson learned from a lot of blood on too many occasions...
Certainly Russia could use much heavier weapons that would level Ukrainian cities. I'm presuming they have the equivalent of Bunker Buster bombs in their arsenal. The problem with that though is if they completely level Ukrainian cities with WMD what would they gain? I don't think the Russians want to rule of a Ukraine of ashes and doing so likely would draw in outside forces. The PRC has the same situation with Taiwan, that they could reduce the island to a radioactive cinder. That wouldn't be considered a good thing by the CCP.
I think it's reasonable to say that we are in a proxy war with Russia over Ukraine much like we were in a proxy war with the Axis before Pearl Harbor. I still think we need to be very very careful about being drawn further in.
