• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Ukraine is game to you?

Ukraine is on the border of Russia, has historically been closely connected to Russia, and a vital national interest for the Russians. Save for the border, none of that is true for NATO or the US. Furthermore, it would be more than a little disadvantageous for NATO and the US to try to fight the Russian army in Ukraine.

So, will Putin invade Ukraine? Probably not.

So, what's he up to?

He wants to expose cracks within NATO and dramatize for the Ukrainians that when push comes to shove the US will not protect Ukraine and may cause a mess for Europe's crucially important gas supplies.

Putin wants NATO and the West to agree with Russia that Ukraine will not be a member of NATO (which Europe does not want anyway). He wants acceptance of Russia's annexation of Crimea and southeastern Ukraine, and he does not want certain threatening weapons in Ukraine or in states bordering Russia.

He wants a deal now, while Biden is weak and has a demonstrated record of being a consistent foreign policy loser. Maybe the US can be split from the rest of NATO on some issues. He probably can't get everything that he wants but he may be able to get some of it and at the same time expose US and NATO differences and weaknesses. This is a very dangerous game. But Ukraine is a vital interest to Russia, and the US leadership is weak and poor.

You won't get much disagreement on the Biden admin looking weak and inviting being tested here. However you really need to look back at Trump's efforts to create those cracks within NATO.

I wish you had more posts like this.
 
wormtongue is perfect

You know it's bad when not even the most pliable Democrat stooges bother to defend the administration anymore. Just go on the offense and hope nobody notices. Not a great sign.
 
No, just tired of your deliberately evasive attempts to avoid any critical discussion with your typical reductionist bullshit.

We kept our commitment in Afghanistan for 20 years until Donald Trump decided to initiate a withdrawal without a defined timetable and then the Biden admin crapped the bed on the execution of it.

I think this really goes back to 2014 far more than anything to do with Afghanistan. The sanctions weren't enough of a future deterrent from the start, and then Trump actually went before the G7 and made a case to excuse Russia's annexation of Crimea, while at the same time extending those same sanctions and working overtly to weaken NATO in the process. 7 years of appeasement from 3 administrations, plus attempting to neuter the regional power check against Russia contributed to Putin knowing he can thumb his nose at the world. And he used that period to leverage Russia's natural gas resources to grab Europe by the balls, which is why they now are stuck on the Neville Chamberlain memorial expressway.

You can argue we haven't treated Russia harshly enough following 2014 and I will agree with you. Your dogmatic narrowing of blame to Afghanistan as being some canary in the coal mine that we won't "keep our commitments" is lazy at best and intellectually dishonest at worst as a transparent attempt to avoid any critical look inward at the role Republican leadership played in this mess.

What in Ukraine is worth fighting for?
 
Perfect on brand response. Now back to the discussion, do you have anything thoughtful to add or has Sailor actually managed to post a more cogent thought on this matter than you could conjure up.
 
Perfect on brand response. Now back to the discussion, do you have anything thoughtful to add or has Sailor actually managed to post a more cogent thought on this matter than you could conjure up.

I'm not sure there's a better question we could be asking ourselves. What is to be gained?
 
You won't get much disagreement on the Biden admin looking weak and inviting being tested here. However you really need to look back at Trump's efforts to create those cracks within NATO.

I wish you had more posts like this.

Trump was not particularly liked in Europe. He is not a likable guy. His argument that European members of NATO should live up to their treaty obligations and contribute more to their military and to NATO was correct. Many European countries had ignored what they had signed and had refused when diplomatically asked by the US to spend what they had promised to spend. In effect, they had for decades pushed a portion of their defense expenses onto American taxpayers and stubbornly refused to budge from that position despite persistent US prompting. Trump pointed out this refusal to meet treaty obligations by many European members of NATO in his typical flamboyant public way. This was no doubt annoying. But it worked better than the quiet diplomacy had as some members of NATO upped their military budgets as a result. He also engaged in trade disputes with various European countries and Brussels bureaucrats. But that's inevitable if you don't want to be taken complete advantage of.
 
Tough talk for someone risking other peoples lives. We aren’t the world police, broseph

We should absolutely expect to be tested, given how weak we have become on the international stage. This type of behavior is a direct result of our failures to lead. Bad actors watch when we blink. We blinked. This isn't hard.
 
You just posted the question what is worth fighting for while following up with how weak we have become. If Russia wants to do what Russia wants to do over there then nothing we do short of troops on the ground full scale war will stop them. There’s no weakness in that it’s just reality and Americans don’t want to be involved in another war. Sure everyone is going to bitch and complain because it’s another global happening that will do something that may effect the supply chain and makes it harder for them to buy some boutique cereal but sure beats dying.

Also should NATO members fulfill their obligations, absolutely, is saying the American tax payers are paying for them actually mean anything, fuck no. You think the American military budget would decrease if all of a sudden NATO members paid more, that’s the most laughable thing ever proposed. I mean shit we just ended a trillion dollar war and the defense budget increased.
 
We should absolutely expect to be tested, given how weak we have become on the international stage. This type of behavior is a direct result of our failures to lead. Bad actors watch when we blink. We blinked. This isn't hard.

Or perhaps a direct result of a series of failed misadventures in the Middle East built on WMD lies and in the name of freedom. Our current weakness dates back to at least 2000.
 
No, just tired of your deliberately evasive attempts to avoid any critical discussion with your typical reductionist bullshit.

We kept our commitment in Afghanistan for 20 years until Donald Trump decided to initiate a withdrawal without a defined timetable and then the Biden admin crapped the bed on the execution of it.

I think this really goes back to 2014 far more than anything to do with Afghanistan. The sanctions weren't enough of a future deterrent from the start, and then Trump actually went before the G7 and made a case to excuse Russia's annexation of Crimea, while at the same time extending those same sanctions and working overtly to weaken NATO in the process. 7 years of appeasement from 3 administrations, plus attempting to neuter the regional power check against Russia contributed to Putin knowing he can thumb his nose at the world. And he used that period to leverage Russia's natural gas resources to grab Europe by the balls, which is why they now are stuck on the Neville Chamberlain memorial expressway.

You can argue we haven't treated Russia harshly enough following 2014 and I will agree with you. Your dogmatic narrowing of blame to Afghanistan as being some canary in the coal mine that we won't "keep our commitments" is lazy at best and intellectually dishonest at worst as a transparent attempt to avoid any critical look inward at the role Republican leadership played in this mess.


This sounds about right.

But watch out...this part:
No, just tired of your deliberately evasive attempts to avoid any critical discussion...


May be a call to Marxism.
 
It’s almost comical how smooth brain here tries to make something fit his narrative. Shit Afghanistan did create a lot of single parent households but they were brown people so probably doesn’t count.
 
Good thing we gave DoD the extra $10B, looks like we are going need it for strength.

If we were fighting this war in space we’d be way ahead of the game. Oh well.
 
It was "much easier" to get the terrorists cough*2.3 trillion and 3k dead*cough by occupying Afghanistan
 
And which administration do you blame that on?

well I mean he didn't support Trump and scurried away from here for 4 years to avoid defending him so he should have no trouble correctly placing blame for this and our "weakness" on the guy who curried dictators and despots
 
Back
Top