Politics

[Doubleplay]

If Trump were President, there would be no war in Ukraine. No lives lost, billions of dollars saved.

That's something the TDS crowd can't wrap their heads around.

How do you know?

 

[sestoppelman]

No

That does not mean we aren't wasting trillions under Biden. It just means from a national interest perspective, one has absolutely nothing to do with the other.

Well, not everyone shares that opinion and just because they dont doesnt mean they are wrong. Its still an opinion.

 

[Brent in Az]

How do you know?

Because Trump is not on the payroll of foreign governments.

 

[sestoppelman]

Because Trump is not on the payroll of foreign governments.

And its pretty clear that Biden is, at least with China and Ukraine and who knows who else?

 

[Brent in Az]

And its pretty clear that Biden is, at least with China and Ukraine and who knows who else?

10% for the big guy!

 

[WAB]

I am reasonably sure that Biden is supporting the war on Ukraine for personal and unethical reasons. However, that doesn’t change the fact that supporting Ukraine is in our national interest. It is possible to despise Biden and support Ukraine. IMO it is extremely shortsighted to oppose the support of Ukraine because Biden does. If we don’t deal with Russia now our grandchildren will deal with a much more difficult and
expensive problem.

 

[WAB]

Oh, and thanks for that Jethro Tull clip @ReLeg! A seriously strange dude playing seriously great music.

 

[sestoppelman]

I am reasonably sure that Biden is supporting the war on Ukraine for personal and unethical reasons. However, that doesn’t change the fact that supporting Ukraine is in our national interest. It is possible to despise Biden and support Ukraine. IMO it is extremely shortsighted to oppose the support of Ukraine because Biden does. If we don’t deal with Russia now our grandchildren will deal with a much more difficult and
expensive problem.

I understand that argument, but it is pure conjecture, no one can foretell the future.
And anyway what generation are you aware of that has not had to deal with those rascally Rooskies in one way or another?

 

[Red Leg]

Well, not everyone shares that opinion and just because they dont doesnt mean they are wrong. Its still an opinion.

No, this is an issue about which there is a correct understanding of our national interests and an incorrect one. I think people who believe that it is in our national interests to support Russia's goals in expanding its East European boundaries are at best uninformed or perhaps naïve, or at worst complicit with Russian international strategy.

This notion that "no one can foretell the future" is nonsensical. What we absolutely can foretell is the catastrophic impact of a triumphant, resurgent Russia on our European flank while we are trying to devote our strategic energies to containing China.

 

[sestoppelman]

No, this is an issue about which there is a correct understanding of our national interests and an incorrect one. I think people who believe that it is in our national interests to support Russia's goals in expanding its East European boundaries are at best uninformed or perhaps naïve, or at worst complicit with Russian international strategy.

This notion that "no one can foretell the future" is nonsensical. What we absolutely can foretell is the catastrophic impact of a triumphant, resurgent Russia on our European flank while we are trying to devote our strategic energies to containing China.

So let me get this straight. You can sit here on a forum, and predict all the things that could happen, all the myriad variable unknowns that could happen next week, month or year, predict the future political situation in Russia, from now until doomsday and tell me that you know for absolute certain, that our involvement in this proxy war is the only way to keep the Bear at bay for the next generations so they wont have to fight them too?
Baloney! Thinking you know the future is what is nonsensical.
You nor anyone else can see the future, there are just simply too many things that can happen in the interim that are unknown and could have profound effects on the whole situation. You cant know what you dont know; the future.
But lets take a positive scenario, that may or may not happen, not knowable at this time.
Suppose tomorrow, Putin says OK enuf already and pulls his troops home. Is that the end of Russian aggression for all of the future, forever? He will just be a good little boy from now on?
I rather doubt it.
Do you think that Russia can be demonstrably defeated by our continued kinda sorta military support of Ukraine?
Its a pipe dream.

 

[Hunt anything]

No, this is an issue about which there is a correct understanding of our national interests and an incorrect one. I think people who believe that it is in our national interests to support Russia's goals in expanding its East European boundaries are at best uninformed or perhaps naïve, or at worst complicit with Russian international strategy.

This notion that "no one can foretell the future" is nonsensical. What we absolutely can foretell is the catastrophic impact of a triumphant, resurgent Russia on our European flank while we are trying to devote our strategic energies to containing China.

I agree wholeheartedly with containing Russia but how serious is the current administration on containing China?

 

[Nevada Mike]

I am reasonably sure that Biden is supporting the war on Ukraine for personal and unethical reasons. However, that doesn’t change the fact that supporting Ukraine is in our national interest. It is possible to despise Biden and support Ukraine. IMO it is extremely shortsighted to oppose the support of Ukraine because Biden does. If we don’t deal with Russia now our grandchildren will deal with a much more difficult and
expensive problem.

Here's the problem(s)

1. The people in the US who are paying for this proxy war have not been included in the decision making process. $13 billion so far and an open ended commitment to prop up a country that was, not long ago, considered hopelessly corrupt.
2. An estimated 350,000 dead Ukranians to further our "National Interests".
3. ZERO accountability for the funds provided. This is insane. See item 1 above.
4. Watch out for the law of Unintended Consequences. If the end game is to depose or eliminate Putin, we are at serious risk of a greater problem... provided that we "WIN" in this conflict.

Sleepy Joe has been opaque, compromised, bought and paid for. He's the Commander in Chief?

I know what... Let's engage in a nuclear conflict with Russia. Brilliant.

 

[Red Leg]

Here's the problem(s)

1. The people in the US who are paying for this proxy war have not been included in the decision making process.$13 lbillion so far and an open ended commitment to prop up a country that was, not long ago, considered hopelessly corrupt.
2. An estimated 250,000 dead Ukranians to further our "National Interests".
3. ZERO accountability for the funds provided. This is insane. See item 1 above.
4. Watch out for the law of Unintended Consequences. If the end game is to depose or eliminate Putin, we are at serious risk of a greater problem... provided that we "WIN" in this conflict.

Sleepy Joe has been opaque, compromised, bought and paid for. He's the Commander in Chief?

I know what... Let's engage in a nuclear conflict with Russia. Brilliant.

Military aid has been roughly $50 billion over two budget cycles. The US budget this year alone is 6.3 Trillion dollars. 50 billion isn't even round off money.

I can not speak for USAID and other State Dept monitored expenditures, but DOD exerts extensive accountability over military aid.

The 250 K number is ludicrous. The best third party analysis to date (Swiss) estimates 76,700 Russian KIA to date. With a 3 to 1 wounded to KIA ratio that means a total of over 300 thousand Russian casualties. That same analysis concluded there were 17,200 Ukrainian KIA.

The "end game" will be a negotiated settlement with Russia. For the moment neither is eager to negotiate. Putin is hoping for a miracle - the election of Trump would be a big part of it, while the Ukrainians are confident they are winning.

No one is suggesting NATO involvement in this war - conventionally or nuclear.

 

[Red Leg]

So let me get this straight. You can sit here on a forum, and predict all the things that could happen, all the myriad variable unknowns that could happen next week, month or year, predict the future political situation in Russia, from now until doomsday and tell me that you know for absolute certain, that our involvement in this proxy war is the only way to keep the Bear at bay for the next generations so they wont have to fight them too?
Baloney! Thinking you know the future is what is nonsensical.
You nor anyone else can see the future, there are just simply too many things that can happen in the interim that are unknown and could have profound effects on the whole situation. You cant know what you dont know; the future.
But lets take a positive scenario, that may or may not happen, not knowable at this time.
Suppose tomorrow, Putin says OK enuf already and pulls his troops home. Is that the end of Russian aggression for all of the future, forever? He will just be a good little boy from now on?
I rather doubt it.
Do you think that Russia can be demonstrably defeated by our continued kinda sorta military support of Ukraine?
Its a pipe dream.

Every investment we make as individuals, communities or nations are based upon future expectations, opportunities and risks. Some people, communities and nations are better at it than others. We, as a nation, devote enormous resources in trying to make those determinations as accurately as possible.

But appeasing Putin would be the right course of action? Conceding to his territorial demands will make him a good little boy? You honestly believe that?

The West tried that with Hitler in '38. I would much rather deal with him as a defanged little boy for as long as possible.

 

[Jfet]

What is being said today about supporting Ukraine sounds very similar to what was said about the 1940’s Lend Lease programs.

GI Roundtable 13: How Shall Lend-Lease Accounts Be Settled? (1945) – AHA

"How Shall Lend-Lease Accounts Be Settled?" by Horace Taylor, was published in January 1945.

www.historians.org

 

[sestoppelman]

Every investment we make as individuals, communities or nations are based upon future expectations, opportunities and risks. Some people, communities and nations are better at it than others. We, as a nation, devote enormous resources in trying to make those determinations as accurate as possible.

But appeasing Putin would be the right course of action? Conceding to his territorial demands will make him a good little boy? You honestly believe that?

The West tried that with Hitler in '38.

I asked YOU if Putin would behave, that was a question not a statement. Of course he wont behave, thats the point! Read what I said and not what you think I said.
That one may not totally agree with what we are doing in the way of taxpayer funded support of a country, not on our continent or even a member of NATO does NOT make one an appeaser.
I really tire of that ludicrous argument.
But you really didnt address any of my questions, so thats fine. You can see the future, no one else can, there is no crystal ball to consult.

 

[sestoppelman]

What is being said today about supporting Ukraine sounds very similar to what was said about the 1940’s Lend Lease programs.

GI Roundtable 13: How Shall Lend-Lease Accounts Be Settled? (1945) – AHA

"How Shall Lend-Lease Accounts Be Settled?" by Horace Taylor, was published in January 1945.

www.historians.org

Not really a good comparison. Hitler was knocking down countries left and right and threatening the whole world, and along with the rising threat from Japan, it was a completely different set of circumstances.

I dont see Russia threatening the whole world. He does not have the might and he knows it, nor I dont think the desire to try.

 

[Jfet]

Gen. Eisenhower was not sure of Allied success on June 6 1944. He was convinced that assaulting the beaches at Normandy was the right thing to do. However, he was prepared with a letter of failure. The choice is between Predicting the future or choosing the right thing to do.

General Eisenhower's Two Statements - Bill of Rights Institute

billofrightsinstitute.org

 

[Jfet]

Not really a good comparison. Hitler was knocking down countries left and right and threatening the whole world, and along with the rising threat from Japan, it was a completely different set of circumstances.

I dont see Russia threatening the whole world. He does not have the might and he knows it, nor I dont think the desire to try.

Hitler did not have an army in 1932. By 1940 it was the best army in the world. It is amazing how fast that transition took place after a little success.

 

[Red Leg]

I asked YOU if Putin would behave, that was a question not a statement. Of course he wont behave, thats the point! Read what I said and not what you think I said.
That one may not totally agree with what we are doing in the way of taxpayer funded support of a country, not on our continent or even a member of NATO does NOT make one an appeaser.
I really tire of that ludicrous argument.
But you really didnt address any of my questions, so thats fine. You can see the future, no one else can, there is no crystal ball to consult.

Exactly. That is the point. Perhaps you should read what I wrote? I do not expect him to behave. But we can focus far more clearly on other concerns - like China - if he no longer has any meaningful way to misbehave. Ukraine is a tiny investment to assure that.

I have repeatedly stated in this interminable discussion the reasons I believe supporting Ukraine is in our critical national interests. Your counter argument seems to boil down to a snide:

You can see the future, no one else can

Every decision we make as a nation, particularly with respect to employing our national power is predicated on analysis of likely and potential outcomes. Sometimes we are right, sometimes wrong, and usually somewhere in between.

Some things I believe - I am hardly alone with respect to them.

I think the Biden administration has been correct in attempting to thwart Putin, and I think they have been negligent with respect to how to exploit our resources to do so most decisively.

I have no idea if Putin would have invaded had Trump been president. I believe Obama and Biden acted in ways that encouraged that aggression. I think it is ridiculous to believe Trump could end this war in 24 hrs.

As I noted above, our investment in Ukraine compared to our budget is miniscule. The one has nothing to do with the wall or any other unfunded need.

In spite of all the naysayers, Ukraine has successfully defeated Russia's attempt to overrun the country, and is slowly mounting an offensive that is threatening Russia's hold on Kherson and Zaporizhzhia provinces.

Defeating Russia's efforts to reconstitute its hold on Eastern Europe now is far easier than dealing with both Russian and Chinese aggression over the next decade and more.