The Soviet Union did all kinds of things we didn’t like, but we didn’t go to war with them because of their nukes. The same is true of China. The threat of escalation into conflict with China and the Soviet Union were major factors in the Korean and Vietnam wars. We ended the Korean war in a ceasefire largely because of the risk of escalation, even though the South Koreans were on the side of the good. We didn’t intervene in the Russian invasions of Afghanistan or their taking of South Ossetia and Crimea for the same reason.
I agree that Crimea should go back to Ukraine. I question whether that is a reasonable goal given the threat of nukes.
It seems to me that the only way this ends without further disaster is to give Putin just enough that he can go home and declare a form of ‘victory’ that no one will believe but might allow him to avoid a firing squad. Push him to the wall, and he might just decide to ‘win’ by simply obliterating parts of Europe.
Dictators with delusions of reconstituting great empires are incredibly dangerous. Give one of them 6,000 nuclear warheads and a losing position in a desperate war, and all bets are off.
This isn’t the breaking news thread. Are tangents not allowed here either?
I just read a couple of interesting articles pointing out that Russia could readily sustain a war at the current intensity for a decade. Whereas the West’s attention span for the current level of Ukrainian support is almost certainly less than 10 years. Even before you consider any traitorous US politicians who might be elected some time in those 10 years.
Conversely, what Russia cannot withstand is a more intense war. Even if fought wholly on Ukrainian soil, if the West + Ukraine can crank up the intensity and destroy more Russian forces faster & more thoroughly, Putin and the Russian economy will run out of resources & manpower to fight with. A shorter war also minimizes the weakness inherent in democracies short attention span when it comes to unpleasant expensive tasks like war-fighting.
in my view, this idea of intensification is a very different thing from ideas about widening the war into Russia itself, or into Crimea or direct NATO military involvement.
It might well be the best way to avoid a “frozen” conflict which has the effect of preventing Ukraine from ever becoming a normal country with a functioning economy again. Or a country that develops normal politics, which they were just haltingly trying to restore in 2020.
Zelenskyy being elected was an incredible stroke of good fortune for Ukraine. I bet things would have been very different today had anyone else won that election. Zelenskyy is also only mortal and the longer Ukraine must endure under wartime conditions and continuous assault whether minor or major, the greater the cumulative likelihood something happens to him, whether natural or man-made. If nothing else they’ll eventually want to run an election if they’re to keep up their stepwise progress to true democracy. Rest assured that if the war is still going on, Russian meddling in that next election will make every bit of opolitical agitprop they’ve ever done look like a Lady’s meeting at church.
Some tangents, but Iraq, not really related at all. That is a pure hijack.
Its really weird how every time America fights a war it is against some reincarnation of Hitler. Apologies for the Iraq hijack
So Ukraine should give Putin Crimea, because he might use nukes? Should Ukraine surrender to Putin because Putin might use nukes? Should NATO cede Poland to Putin because Putin might use nukes?
In this case, Putin is behaving exactly like Hitler. But Hitler is such a bogeyman, that Russia apologists shout, ‘Godwinism!’ It isn’t Godwinism when the comparison is apt. Godwin said so himself.
I dont think you can realistically say he is exactly like Hitler. All due respect, I don’t like him either.
No one use the word “exactly” but you. Drop the hijack attempt.
Oh shit, you’re right. Nevermind and my apologies.
No problem. Im out of this thread for tonight anyway
I’d be very interested in a cite, because what I’ve seen indicates the opposite. That Russia is burning through materials stockpiled in the Soviet era that its economy is not capable of replacing in a timely fashion.
‘Exactly’ as in motives and methods. I mean, Putin doesn’t have a Charlie Chaplin moustache.
In any case, I have neither the time nor inclination to continue the hijack, nor to enumerate the similarities.
That works for me as well.
Ukraine is a world crisis. Put aside for the moment that millions of people are living in rubble, with terrorist attacks against civilians a daily fear and that nobody on either side can make even an educated guess how long they can hold out.
Several millions of people are refugees in other European countries. The world’s access to food and raw materials has been hugely disrupted. Non-western countries are being forced to chose between the countries that pour money into their economies and the ones that hector them about rights violations.
Now add onto that the constant threat that nuclear weapons will be deployed if for a moment the bully doesn’t get his way.
What the U.S. has done in the past is no more significant at this moment in time than what Russia has done in the past. This is Putin’s war of expansion, a hinge moment in history. If he is given even an inch because of his depredations, the future turns dire. Countries, areas, peoples, all will be at risk. Ukraine is not like Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, or other localized horrors. Criticize those all you want. Ukraine is a potential trigger of world change. I have no idea what needs to be done. But it needs to be done.
Probably paywalled, but here’s a start
The key being that forcing their economy to the wall is how we stop them bleeding Ukraine at the pace they choose. Which pace will be chosen to be sustainable for them.
We all should make sure that Russia is punished severely for what it pulled, so that it doesn’t try it again. But let’s be clear: The conventional military threat from Russia is over. They are burning through their huge inventory of old Soviet weapons, and once they are gone Russia will never be anything but a second-rate military power. They aren’t going to Blitzkrieg through Europe, and all their other smaller neighbors are either already in NATO or soon will be. Russia’s military budget is 1/10 that of the US, and even that is a stretch for their economy.
As for punishing Russia, that’s already happened. If all they manage is to keep Crimea, the entire war is a huge loss to them. They’ve permanently lost a large, irreplaceable amount of equipment, a huge number of men, and sanctions will take their toll forever.
The trick is to make sure that Putin knows he lost, his generals know they lost, the people know they lost, but Putin and his generals are given just enough of a fig leaf that they can spin the loss into a ‘victory’ that keeps them in power. A power that is completely neutralized outside of Russia.
There is another good reason to end this war: China. China is eyeing Taiwan, and counting up all the military hardware and ammunition we are expending and the public’s tolerance for continued conflict. Every day the Ukraine war continues, a war with China becomes more likely.
The way to end this war is to ensure Ukraine has what they need to expel the Russian invaders. That’s the only way to end this war.