Politics

[WAB]

Wow! What a monumental load of neocon BS! Next time you go golfing with Lindsey Graham, be sure to tell him how handsome he is and that all of the boys he buggars are sooooooo LUCKY!!!

Here is also a list of US Foreign aid I oppose:
Countries That Received the Most Foreign Aid From the U.S. in 2022:

• Israel ($3.3B)
• Ethiopia ($2.2B)
• Afghanistan ($1.39B)
• Yemen ($1.38B)
• Egypt ($1.37B)
• Jordan ($1.19B)
• Nigeria ($1.15B)

I didn't realize that NOT paying these people makes me guilty of supporting their enemies. I didn't give to BLM, so I guess I belong to the Klan now. I don't support the ADL, so I guess I'm an honorary HAMAS member (Yay!). I oppose support to Afghanistan, which, I guess made me anti-American for a couple of decades. I oppose support for Yemen, you know, those little scamps who have closed one of the most important shipping lanes in the world, guess this makes me a Saudi, whew! Looking forward to those oil royalties!!$$!! I opposed Biden draining our strategic oil reserve for votes and to decrease the price of oil to hurt Putin. Sure, cut into our defensive capabilities as a protest against Vladimir Putin.


Nice jab! Failing to send arms to Putin's enemies makes us part of The Axis of Evil ! We also didn't sent $160B to the Tutsi's so I guess the Rwandan genocide is on us too.

"And no, I am not interested in hearing about the false choice between border security and Ukraine. In a country where the government spent over SIX TRILLION dollars, creating an either/or fallacy over the border and Ukraine is Sophism at its worst. Both parties tried to take political advantage of the border crisis by using the legislation supporting Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan as a pawn. That political maneuvering took place over the bodies of Ukrainian soldiers and civilians."

You're right about US border security and Ukraine border security being a false choice. We don't have secure borders because the US policy class enjoys the payoffs, bribes, kickbacks, and total societal disruption caused by the ENTIRELY OPEN US border (I would say Southern border but with the Biden Administration paying the airfare and dropping ALL of the international travel restrictions to fly 335,000 illegal immigrants directly into the United States, the excuse of "not paying attention" is gone when absolute treason (by BOTH PARTIES) is obvious.

"Ukrainian defensive lines have held remarkably well considering US indecisiveness and Russia's all out effort to try and take advantage of it. It would appear Putin desperately wanted a recognizable battlefield victory in time for the May 9th Victory Day parade in Moscow. The Ukrainians, despite the Republican House's best efforts to support him, are not cooperating."

Again, with the false equivalents of "You better support Ukraine or Putin is you boyfriend!" is horseshit.

Answer me this, oh great and valiant protector of Truth, Justice and the American Way, when the Ukrainians run out of men, boys, and senior citizens, how much money should we send then? $1T? $2T, $100T? Are we going to send nukes? Are we going to send our military men and women into the fight?

You know our military might is greatly diminished right now, correct? In addition to be exhausted by 2 decades of constant war, those in charge are carrying out the agendas of DEI, BLM, and the LGBT organizations, which makes the military unbelievably unattractive for straight young men (thanks Joe Biden, Gen Miley, Lloyd Austin, and George Soros!) So young men aren't joining. So, there is considerable discussion about re-implementing the Draft. I have 2 boys that are drafting age and the thought that they might be drafted into the US military to be sent to Ukraine makes me sick. But I guess I HAVE TO otherwise Putin is my boyfriend. I'm going to miss them. Luckily, Russians are at least white so if my boys kill some, they won't be called racists and convicted of a hate crime by their own militaries.

Hopefully, Putin doesn't send in Iranians, who are brown and my boys might have to fight them. Because our military leaders are completely brainwashed retarded fools who will have to have meetings with Ibram X. Kendi or Patrisse Cullors on "What weapons can be used against people of color in foreign wars" where it will be decided that for reasons of "equity" white solders should only be armed with suggestive perfumes and sex toys when fighting people of color. It is their duty to "understand" their white privileged or male privilege and seek to love people of color even if it means that their going to be tortured or killed...

Blah blah blah.

The current government of the US, both parties, don't give two shits about the American people or the Ukrainians and neither do you.

Say hi to Victoria Nuland and Klaus Schwab for me.

Is it too much to ask to keep our discourse civil? It is possible to disagree with someone and still treat them with dignity and respect.

 

[Kevin Peacocke]

No one here is disputing that these things happen, and I think we are probably all pretty much in agreement about whether these things are bad. At the same time, it is still a fringe issue in the grand scheme of things, and we would be better off not catastrophizing.

Yes, but if something is bad as you concede it is Saul, I think what would be far more unifying would be to hear that from the Democratic leadership too. Silence is acceptance I am afraid.

 

[Saul]

Yes, but if something is bad as you concede it is Saul, I think what would be far more unifying would be to hear that from the Democratic leadership too. Silence is acceptance I am afraid.

You are correct, and it is something that dissapoints me greatly.

 

[Doubleplay]

I'm a pro-segregation racist because I want to see legislation passed that bans puberty blockers for children and I don't want tax dollars to pay for sex change operations for adults?

That doesn't seem to track.

You asked for examples of government action...

Here's a ruling for taxpayer funded sex change operations for adults...
https://www.latimes.com/world-natio...re-coverage-policies-discriminate-judges-rule


Here's one of the examples of a parent losing a court decision to stop hormone treatment for his child...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-13030699/gender-transition-custody-

These are not government actions, they’re court cases.
If you don’t believe in our justice system being independent I have no argument to carry on with you because it’s meaningless.
Also keep in mind at the time segregation advocates and Jim Crow did not believe they were racist, they thought they were doing the right thing.

 

[Brent in Az]

The saga of speaker Mike Johnson's incompetence continues.......

 

[fourfive8]

Thank you. I think your response represents exactly the point I was trying to make.

Holy crap, war mongers get everything they want and are still complaining. The most intense gaslight in the world is when the well oiled, deep state machine of the military-industrial complex visits the SCIF. Of course material presented by the "schlickmeisters", no matter how exaggerated or bogus, is always deemed classified so will never see the light of day and will remain hidden from scrutiny- how convenient! Get Johnson into the SCIF, he wets his pants then comes out to push and sign the bill as any obedient uni-party speaker should. Even the war hawk RINOS tried it earlier with the SCIF treatment about how Russia could neutralize our satellites by touching off a nuke in space. Forget the reality about how that technology is no secret and has been available to both the US and Russia since the 60s. Forget the reality that touching off a nuke in space would fry everyone's satellites. My oh my- details, details. Likely a similar tactic was employed by a different cadre of deep state operatives to get Johnson and enough in the uni-party to go with the FISA renewal.

I'm still curious how this Ukraine war is supposed to end? The track record of following much of this same advice doesn't look very appealing. Vietnam? Iraq? Afghanistan? Please outline how this same advice worked out in those wars. Come to think of it Trump was not a player in any of them~ hmmm? If I have my history correct they all ended with the US spending trillions, losing thousands of soldiers not counting the collateral civilian losses and accomplishing exactly what? The last time the US got into a big fight to stop an enemy (two enemies) was WW2. I imagine there were free drinks all around compliments of the lobby sleaze after the big budget vote.

 

[Red Leg]

Holy crap, war mongers get everything they want and are still complaining. The most intense gaslight in the world is when the well oiled, deep state machine of the military-industrial complex visits the SCIF. Of course material presented by the "schlickmeisters", no matter how exaggerated or bogus, is always deemed classified so will never see the light of day and will remain hidden from scrutiny- how convenient! Get Johnson into the SCIF, he wets his pants then comes out to push and sign the bill as any obedient uni-party speaker should. Even the war hawk RINOS tried it earlier with the SCIF treatment about how Russia could neutralize our satellites by touching off a nuke in space. Forget the reality about how that technology is no secret and has been available to both the US and Russia since the 60s. Forget the reality that touching off a nuke in space would fry everyone's satellites. My oh my- details, details. Likely a similar tactic was employed by a different cadre of deep state operatives to get Johnson and enough in the uni-party to go with the FISA renewal.

I'm still curious how this Ukraine war is supposed to end? The track record of following much of this same advice doesn't look very appealing. Vietnam? Iraq? Afghanistan? Please outline how this same advice worked out in those wars. Come to think of it Trump was not a player in any of them~ hmmm? If I have my history correct they all ended with the US spending trillions, losing thousands of soldiers not counting the collateral civilian losses and accomplishing exactly what? The last time the US got into a big fight to stop an enemy (two enemies) was WW2. I imagine there were free drinks all around compliments of the lobby sleaze after the big budget vote.

But we aren't fighting this one.

So you have attended a lot of classified briefings at cabinet and congressional leadership level? Perhaps you could share some of those experiences which provide such insight into the machinations of the military industrial complex. My participation has only been as a briefer, and those were experiences that are now quite dated. I simply remember the Army staff expending enormous due diligence with respect to the accuracy of our presentations. Perhaps your experiences were different?

 

[flatwater bill]

@Red Leg Thank you for posting the article. I have read it....and many many more. About 90% of the Americans I talk to are firmly in the camp of Rachel Maddow....and the MNM. Many are emotional and almost tearful when they pledge their allegiance to Ukraine and the war effort. Many are angry at me, so effective is the propaganda blitz. About 10% have actually thought about it critically, and some, maybe 5%, still agree with Rachel. War at all cost. War forever. That is OK, at least they have thought it thru. I think you are one of the latter, and I respect your opinion. Your opinion is YOURS, not hers. But please, look beyond polling. In Ukraine it is very difficult to know what the people want. They are not a homogeneous people. The National Democratic Institute is very biased. Try this, ask a question to a middle aged Ukrainian from the East, and ask it in Russian. Ask the same question in the West to a college age kid, and ask it in Ukrainian. The Kyiv International Institute of Sociology will always get the answers Tony Blinken and Sec Nuland want and need. And remember the elections held in The Donbas? They were rigged and invalid, right? Our Rachel Maddow and colleagues told us so. Or was that what they needed to tell us? Generals, The President, and a few others want a forever war. If negotiations will end this war, and most think that it will come to that eventually, then why not now? Why not BEFORE we have more young boys and girls killed? It is tough to poll people in the Donbas since their native language was outlawed, and if they speak Russian in unoccupied areas they are persecuted. If you would like to speak with an actual Ukrainian....one that speaks decent English, PM me. But don't expect a "thank you" from them..............FWB

 

[Brent in Az]

Non political post.

A 3 horse photo finish at the Kentucky derby. That was exciting to watch. Celebrating 150 years

 

[Mekaniks]

Non political post.

A 3 horse photo finish at the Kentucky derby. That was exciting to watch. Celebrating 150 years

Yes Sir, that was an exciting finish!

 

[Red Leg]

@Red Leg Thank you for posting the article. I have read it....and many many more. About 90% of the Americans I talk to are firmly in the camp of Rachel Maddow....and the MNM. Many are emotional and almost tearful when they pledge their allegiance to Ukraine and the war effort. Many are angry at me, so effective is the propaganda blitz. About 10% have actually thought about it critically, and some, maybe 5%, still agree with Rachel. War at all cost. War forever. That is OK, at least they have thought it thru. I think you are one of the latter, and I respect your opinion. Your opinion is YOURS, not hers. But please, look beyond polling. In Ukraine it is very difficult to know what the people want. They are not a homogeneous people. The National Democratic Institute is very biased. Try this, ask a question to a middle aged Ukrainian from the East, and ask it in Russian. Ask the same question in the West to a college age kid, and ask it in Ukrainian. The Kyiv International Institute of Sociology will always get the answers Tony Blinken and Sec Nuland want and need. And remember the elections held in The Donbas? They were rigged and invalid, right? Our Rachel Maddow and colleagues told us so. Or was that what they needed to tell us? Generals, The President, and a few others want a forever war. If negotiations will end this war, and most think that it will come to that eventually, then why not now? Why not BEFORE we have more young boys and girls killed? It is tough to poll people in the Donbas since their native language was outlawed, and if they speak Russian in unoccupied areas they are persecuted. If you would like to speak with an actual Ukrainian....one that speaks decent English, PM me. But don't expect a "thank you" from them..............FWB

I can not tell you how much I appreciate this response. It is well reasoned and states your opinion clearly and why you hold it. While I may disagree with much of it - particularly the Rachel Maddow reference, the basis for that position reflects one based upon logic and actual experience. I would only ask as we talk about this in the coming weeks and likely months, that I be afforded the same courtesy in recognizing that my observations reflect a different and yet similar foundation of experience and reasoning.

Because I was one, I would first like to disabuse anyone reading this exchange that generals want a "forever war" - now or at anytime. In fact, it has been my personal experience that the leadership group who have most advocated for caution in the application of military force are the uniformed leadership of the services. Unlike politicians, the uniformed members of the executive branch have no illusions about the cost of war. The madmen wearing stars wanting a world forever at war are the creation of Hollywood and novelists.

My own personal experience encompasses Army Chief of Staff Rick Shinseki, Secretary of State (and retired General) Colin Powell, Army Secretary (and retired Brigadier General) Tom White, and General Jack Keane all of whom expressed great concerns about the incursion into Iraq particularly. Because we have a republic where uniformed personnel are expected to obey civilian leadership those reservations rarely find there way outside the Oval Office or the office of the SECDEF. But just a very little research can find you very clear examples of that reluctance being expressed or implied, particularly during congressional hearings.

These are dated, but so is the Iraq war. They fairly accurately outline the position the Army Chief took with respect to Iraq and the application of force generally. I should note that it was my job both as Chief of Legislative Liaison, but also as an old Middle East hand to carry that message to congress. It was a message that effectively ended several military careers. But it was the truth as we understood it.

The General Who Got It Right on Iraq

When Donald H.

www.latimes.com

The General who Understood Iraq from the Start - Dissent Magazine

tk

www.dissentmagazine.org

With respect to Ukraine, this war will indeed end in negotiations. But the outcome of those negotiations, like every war-ending negotiation in the history of the world, will be determined by the facts on the ground. Zelensky, Putin, and Jake Sullivan (I deliberately leave Biden out of this discussion) all know this as well. Since the first two weeks of the war, Putin's negotiating position was never stronger than when republicans were holding hostage military funding for Ukraine. The lack of artillery munitions, and particularly the inability to replenish Patriot air defense missiles consigned far too many Ukrainians to casualty lists - military and civilian. That represents my personal professional military judgment.

That calculus now changes. Patriot missiles and ATACMS long range missiles along with tech to defeat GPS jammers will fill the first shipments to Ukraine. That will soon reduce the effectiveness of Russian strategic cruise and ballistic missile strikes, but will also put at risk their tactical aviation and assembly areas.

Russia is losing a thousand casualties a day. Without full mobilization, which Putin seems politically incapable of initiating, that can only be sustained so long. I have no idea how accurate an appreciation of the battlefield Putin has (dictators have a well deserved historical reputation for surrounding themselves with toddies and yes men), but futility will eventually seep into the general population. Unless he wants to replay Nicholas II, he will recognize that shift in support.

You make a very valid point with respect to the Ukrainian and Ukrainian-Russian view of the conflict. This is particularly true in the Donbass. The only counter that I would make is that hundreds of thousands of other Ukrainians are voicing their support for an independent and Western aligned Ukraine in the most fundamental way possible each and every day.

You asked rhetorically how this would end and why not now. The now is easy. The majority of Ukrainians have little in common with the native Russian speakers in the Donbas. They are absolutely committed to an independent Western European aligned future. Russia, for the moment, still owns the initiative on the battlefield. They have little incentive to compromise. I think that will change as the year progresses and Western support increases again. My best guess is that somewhere around a year from now, an agreement is reached that returns Kherson and Zaporizhzhia to Ukraine and the Donetsk, Luhansk. and Crimea fall under a Russian mandate. Ukraine will enter the EU, but rather than NATO, territorial guarantees will be provided by the US and the UK.

Russia will have been significantly weakened, needing a generation to rebuild a modern army. Thanks to Sweden and Finland, the Baltic will have become a NATO lake, and the NATO border will have been advanced to the gates of St, Petersburg putting at risk all the Russian northern fleet and particularly its submarines. Probably not the outcome the little KGB functionary envisioned two years ago.

But no one knows. A collapse of the Russian field army or fall of the Zelensky government could change everything.

 

[crossone]

Is it too much to ask to keep our discourse civil? It is possible to disagree with someone and still treat them with dignity and respect.

You're right WAB. I apologize.

crossone

 

[WAB]

@Red Leg Thank you for posting the article. I have read it....and many many more. About 90% of the Americans I talk to are firmly in the camp of Rachel Maddow....and the MNM. Many are emotional and almost tearful when they pledge their allegiance to Ukraine and the war effort. Many are angry at me, so effective is the propaganda blitz. About 10% have actually thought about it critically, and some, maybe 5%, still agree with Rachel. War at all cost. War forever. That is OK, at least they have thought it thru. I think you are one of the latter, and I respect your opinion. Your opinion is YOURS, not hers. But please, look beyond polling. In Ukraine it is very difficult to know what the people want. They are not a homogeneous people. The National Democratic Institute is very biased. Try this, ask a question to a middle aged Ukrainian from the East, and ask it in Russian. Ask the same question in the West to a college age kid, and ask it in Ukrainian. The Kyiv International Institute of Sociology will always get the answers Tony Blinken and Sec Nuland want and need. And remember the elections held in The Donbas? They were rigged and invalid, right? Our Rachel Maddow and colleagues told us so. Or was that what they needed to tell us? Generals, The President, and a few others want a forever war. If negotiations will end this war, and most think that it will come to that eventually, then why not now? Why not BEFORE we have more young boys and girls killed? It is tough to poll people in the Donbas since their native language was outlawed, and if they speak Russian in unoccupied areas they are persecuted. If you would like to speak with an actual Ukrainian....one that speaks decent English, PM me. But don't expect a "thank you" from them..............FWB

Bill,

I have a different view of the Ukrainian perspective on this war. Mine is based on the roughly 60 Ukraine children adopted in our church, including our daughter. As a result of this, I have spent quite a bit of time in Ukraine and have a number of close friends there. To a person they abhor and are terrified by Putin. I am convinced that should Ukraine do as you wish, and capitulate to Putin, the atrocities we have seen to date would pale by comparison to what Putin would unleash on the Ukraine people in retribution for their audacity to want self determination.

I may be incorrect, but I think that my assumptions are supported by the dogged determination that Ukraine has exhibited in resisting Russian aggression.

WAB

 

[flatwater bill]

@WAB thank you for your thoughtful input. The people of Ukraine are not a homogeneous group, as I have stated. My friends/family feel totally different, totally isolated, totally persecuted by Kyiv, Moscow and the USA. I think you are wrong. Russia will not run thru the country like zombies, murdering at will. Putin has also had enough of this war. And I am not talking of surrender, but a truce. And negotiation.
There were 20 separate times that Putin asked the West for closer ties and cooperation...we rebuffed him. And now, the people of Ukraine have to suffer for our arrogance and his violence. Don't believe that the World will suddenly be better off if Russia collapses...........5500 nukes without central govt. control will spell the end of civilization,....and not just for Ukraine. ........Thanks for helping the children.....I have also done this.................FWB

 

[WAB]

@WAB thank you for your thoughtful input. The people of Ukraine are not a homogeneous group, as I have stated. My friends/family feel totally different, totally isolated, totally persecuted by Kyiv, Moscow and the USA. I think you are wrong. Russia will not run thru the country like zombies, murdering at will. Putin has also had enough of this war. And I am not talking of surrender, but a truce. And negotiation.
There were 20 separate times that Putin asked the West for closer ties and cooperation...we rebuffed him. And now, the people of Ukraine have to suffer for our arrogance and his violence. Don't believe that the World will suddenly be better off if Russia collapses...........5500 nukes without central govt. control will spell the end of civilization,....and not just for Ukraine. ........Thanks for helping the children.....I have also done this.................FWB

I wish we could get together and discuss this over a drink. I would greatly value your insights. We are both working with limited data sets, which would benefit from expanded viewpoints.

Our daughter is Rus, the other young lady we sponsored in is ethnic Ukraine. Very different perspectives on the world. Both hate Putin.

 

[John Wasmuth]

 

[LivingTheDream]

I actually think that Jake Sullivan played the Republican party with regards to Ukraine aid, President Biden still had the ability to use draw down authority to provide additional military supplies to Ukraine. However, the Republicans fell directly into that trap/narrative that they had to pass something, and the administration held back to put pressure on the Republicans and to set the narrative that they were assisting Putin.

I have voiced this opinion before but I honestly believe the current Administration has no desire for Ukraine to "win". They want the Ukrainians to kill Russians and weaken them for a generation, both militarily and through loss of personnel. As pointed out, the Russians are losing a 1000 men a day (how many of those are truly russian, or paid mercenaries, I don't think any one knows). The tactics being used my Ukraine from what I have seen and what I have heard described by people far smarter than me, is Ukraine troops are swooping in killing all Russian troops and falling back to defensive positions.

The Administration has also been hesitant to give new weapons and using the excuse of "escalation" as to why. They have also been hesitant to green light attacks into Russia and basically told Ukraine to stop hitting oil refineries. This doesn't sound like the policy of someone who seriously wants this war to end and end quickly.

This might not be a popular opinion but us discussing the back and forth merits of the war, the funding or debating how the funding could be used for border security, is the equivalent of "give the people circuses". I find the updates and analysis insight, educational and worthwhile, but debating the politics of it isnt. The goals have been established and thousands will pay dearly for the arrogance and ambition of geo-political strategists.

 

[Kevin Peacocke]

I can not tell you how much I appreciate this response. It is well reasoned and states your opinion clearly and why you hold it. While I may disagree with much of it - particularly the Rachel Maddow reference, the basis for that position reflects one based upon logic and actual experience. I would only ask as we talk about this in the coming weeks and likely months, that I be afforded the same courtesy in recognizing that my observations reflect a different and yet similar foundation of experience and reasoning.

Because I was one, I would first like to disabuse anyone reading this exchange that generals want a "forever war" - now or at anytime. In fact, it has been my personal experience that the leadership group who have most advocated for caution in the application of military force are the uniformed leadership of the services. Unlike politicians, the uniformed members of the executive branch have no illusions about the cost of war. The madmen wearing stars wanting a world forever at war are the creation of Hollywood and novelists.

My own personal experience encompasses Army Chief of Staff Rick Shinseki, Secretary of State (and retired General) Colin Powell, Army Secretary (and retired Brigadier General) Tom White, and General Jack Keane all of whom expressed great concerns about the incursion into Iraq particularly. Because we have a republic where uniformed personnel are expected to obey civilian leadership those reservations rarely find there way outside the Oval Office or the office of the SECDEF. But just a very little research can find you very clear examples of that reluctance being expressed or implied, particularly during congressional hearings.

These are dated, but so is the Iraq war. They fairly accurately outline the position the Army Chief took with respect to Iraq and the application of force generally. I should note that it was my job both as Chief of Legislative Liaison, but also as an old Middle East hand to carry that message to congress. It was a message that effectively ended several military careers. But it was the truth as we understood it.

The General Who Got It Right on Iraq

When Donald H.

www.latimes.com

The General who Understood Iraq from the Start - Dissent Magazine

tk

www.dissentmagazine.org

With respect to Ukraine, this war will indeed end in negotiations. But the outcome of those negotiations, like every war-ending negotiation in the history of the world, will be determined by the facts on the ground. Zelensky, Putin, and Jake Sullivan (I deliberately leave Biden out of this discussion) all know this as well. Since the first two weeks of the war, Putin's negotiating position was never stronger than when republicans were holding hostage military funding for Ukraine. The lack of artillery munitions, and particularly the inability to replenish Patriot air defense missiles consigned far too many Ukrainians to casualty lists - military and civilian. That represents my personal professional military judgment.

That calculus now changes. Patriot missiles and ATACMS long range missiles along with tech to defeat GPS jammers will fill the first shipments to Ukraine. That will soon reduce the effectiveness of Russian strategic cruise and ballistic missile strikes, but will also put at risk their tactical aviation and assembly areas.

Russia is losing a thousand casualties a day. Without full mobilization, which Putin seems politically incapable of initiating, that can only be sustained so long. I have no idea how accurate an appreciation of the battlefield Putin has (dictators have a well deserved historical reputation for surrounding themselves with toddies and yes men), but futility will eventually seep into the general population. Unless he wants to replay Nicholas II, he will recognize that shift in support.

You make a very valid point with respect to the Ukrainian and Ukrainian-Russian view of the conflict. This is particularly true in the Donbass. The only counter that I would make is that hundreds of thousands of other Ukrainians are voicing their support for an independent and Western aligned Ukraine in the most fundamental way possible each and every day.

You asked rhetorically how this would end and why not now. The now is easy. The majority of Ukrainians have little in common with the native Russian speakers in the Donbas. They are absolutely committed to an independent Western European aligned future. Russia, for the moment, still owns the initiative on the battlefield. They have little incentive to compromise. I think that will change as the year progresses and Western support increases again. My best guess is that somewhere around a year from now, an agreement is reached that returns Kherson and Zaporizhzhia to Ukraine and the Donetsk, Luhansk. and Crimea fall under a Russian mandate. Ukraine will enter the EU, but rather than NATO, territorial guarantees will be provided by the US and the UK.

Russia will have been significantly weakened, needing a generation to rebuild a modern army. Thanks to Sweden and Finland, the Baltic will have become a NATO lake, and the NATO border will have been advanced to the gates of St, Petersburg putting at risk all the Russian northern fleet and particularly its submarines. Probably not the outcome the little KGB functionary envisioned two years ago.

But no one knows. A collapse of the Russian field army or fall of the Zelensky government could change everything.

Favourable outcomes are not merely hoped for, they must be engineered. Remember entropy has a human dimension.

 

[Red Leg]

I actually think that Jake Sullivan played the Republican party with regards to Ukraine aid, President Biden still had the ability to use draw down authority to provide additional military supplies to Ukraine. However, the Republicans fell directly into that trap/narrative that they had to pass something, and the administration held back to put pressure on the Republicans and to set the narrative that they were assisting Putin.

I have voiced this opinion before but I honestly believe the current Administration has no desire for Ukraine to "win". They want the Ukrainians to kill Russians and weaken them for a generation, both militarily and through loss of personnel. As pointed out, the Russians are losing a 1000 men a day (how many of those are truly russian, or paid mercenaries, I don't think any one knows). The tactics being used my Ukraine from what I have seen and what I have heard described by people far smarter than me, is Ukraine troops are swooping in killing all Russian troops and falling back to defensive positions.

The Administration has also been hesitant to give new weapons and using the excuse of "escalation" as to why. They have also been hesitant to green light attacks into Russia and basically told Ukraine to stop hitting oil refineries. This doesn't sound like the policy of someone who seriously wants this war to end and end quickly.

This might not be a popular opinion but us discussing the back and forth merits of the war, the funding or debating how the funding could be used for border security, is the equivalent of "give the people circuses". I find the updates and analysis insight, educational and worthwhile, but debating the politics of it isnt. The goals have been established and thousands will pay dearly for the arrogance and ambition of geo-political strategists.

Sadly, whether by calculation, genuine fear of escalation, or sheer incompetence, the net effect of US support to Ukraine has been as you have described. The American effort is being led by Jake Sullivan, the National Security Advisor. As I have noted elsewhere here, he has neither foreign policy or military experience. He is an election strategist, for God’s sake.

An assertive SECDEF could have made all the difference, but we have the exact opposite. Austin has seemingly been so deferential to civilian authority (he is a retired GO) that he is incapable of championing a militarily coherent strategy. As one of my old mentors has repeatedly noted, the lack of imagination in both the NSC and Pentagon has been appalling.

The dithering in Washington is another reason I give so much credit to Zelensky and the Ukrainian armed forces. They are the ones who have taken taken what they can get while employing art of war changing new technologies to fight the full might of Russian Army to a standstill over two and a half years of some of the most intensive combat since WWII. They deserve a better ally than either party in this administration.

 

[VertigoBE]

My best guess is that somewhere around a year from now, an agreement is reached that returns Kherson and Zaporizhzhia to Ukraine and the Donetsk, Luhansk. and Crimea fall under a Russian mandate. Ukraine will enter the EU, but rather than NATO, territorial guarantees will be provided by the US and the UK.

I made this exact suggestion as the foreseeable result two weeks after the start of the invasion of Ukraine. Then, your answer was not to start to negotiate to that effect (or rather push Zelensky to the negotiating table) but to send more arms.

From your above response, I understand that you still do not see a possibility to push for these negotiations now, but only a year from now.

But why not? Why could this not have been possible at the start, or now, but only in one years time in your estimation? What has changed?