Why are we rushing to defend Ukraine? [merged threads]

[Dashinka 24,638]

13 hours ago, TBoneTX said:

To The Last Ukrainian

 

It was Vladimir Putin who initially noted that the West is willing to fight Russia to the last Ukrainian.  Well, it looks like it's finally happening -- we've run out of Ukrainians, or at least we ran out of the ones willing to die for their country.  Ukraine is running short of the young, fertile, and productive.  [...]

 

https://americanmind.org/salvo/to-the-last-ukrainian/

Interesting.  Seems Poland is similar to China when they catch a DPRK defector.

[Dashinka 24,638]

12 hours ago, Mike E said:

It is  apparent that while Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, Truman, Ike, LBJ, and GWB, were willing to fight to last American, their use of conscription (backdoor draft for GWB) did  not indicate they actually ran out of Americans. Simply visit places like Hiroshima if anyone has any doubt.

We shall see.  I expect Zelenskyy will start requesting manpower from the West.  In the end, it should be Zelenskyy and Putin squaring off in a round of Russian Roulette.

[TBoneTX 45,603]

12 hours ago, Dashinka said:

Poland is similar to China

And a Poland China is a breed of pig!

 

Edited September 11, 2023 by TBoneTX

[TBoneTX 45,603]

Interesting.  Thoughts?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Afghanistan delusions blind US on Russia-Ukraine

 

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/afghanistan-war/

[Mike E 11,741]

3 minutes ago, TBoneTX said:

Interesting.  Thoughts?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Afghanistan delusions blind US on Russia-Ukraine

 

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/afghanistan-war/

“Nonetheless, given the appalling costs that resulted from the U.S. invasion, it is worth asking whether an approach that allowed the Taliban to save face and remain true to their own beliefs might have produced better results for both Americans and Afghans: for example, exploring the possibility that the Taliban could be persuaded to deliver the AQ leadership to another Muslim country.”

Has nothing to do with the U.S.’s involvement in Ukraine and this is deluded. U.S. shuda pounded the #### out of Taliban, killing every leader, and then left, with an annual tune up as needed, and then totally isolating the Taliban from the world economy.

 

“it is therefore time to start developing a political strategy to end the fighting in Ukraine and the economic and political damage this is beginning to cause to vital U.S. allies in Europe.”

IOW let Russia annex Ukraine. Not America’s choice.

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=ruble+to+usd&rlz=1CDGOYI_enAT607US608&oq=ruble+to+&aqs=chrome.0.0i433i512j69i57j0i512l8.7130j0j4&hl=en-US&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8
 

“winning!”

 

 

[TBoneTX 45,603]

1 hour ago, Mike E said:

this is deluded

Some of the logic did seem rather hosed.

[Dashinka 24,638]

Hmm,  I didn't know there were neocons at the Guardian.

 

Putin is waging a forever war. The west can’t pull the plug on Ukraine now

 

Here’s what to do: welcome Ukraine into Nato and the EU without further delay. Offer security guarantees and safe sea lanes now, backed by Nato firepower, red lines, more arms, planes and no-fly zones. Warn China, Iran and North Korea to back off. Stop talking about talks. Accept there can be no peace until Russia unconditionally withdraws.

 

Will the politicians get it at last? Let’s hope so – because while Putin rules, there will be no quick way out, no middle path, no easily available diplomatic fudge. Ukraine must win – or we all lose.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/commentisfree/2023/sep/02/putin-is-waging-a-forever-war-the-west-cant-pull-the-plug-on-ukraine-now

[Boiler 45,735]

I have come to the conclusion that the Guardian mainly operates on emotions, some, all? of which can be contradicted by reality and then their heads start spinning.

 

Quite amusing especially when they leave comments open.

[TBoneTX 45,603]

2 hours ago, Boiler said:

I have come to the conclusion that the Guardian mainly operates on emotions, some, all? of which can be contradicted by reality and then their heads start spinning.

 

Quite amusing especially when they leave comments open.

Said in Texas:  "Be thankful for fools.  Without them, none of us would amount to a damn."

[Pooky 3,821]

Sweden considering sending Saas JAS39 Gripens to Ukraine.

 

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/sweden-considering-donating-jas-39-gripens-to-ukraine-report

 

if the F-16s concern Russia, Gripens will give them nightmares. Far better suited to the conditions and a class above the Viper.

[Boiler 45,735]

That was always the best solution, effectively designed for this situation.

[Boiler 45,735]

 

[Dashinka 24,638]

Interesting analysis.

 

The Russian invasion was a rational act
 

These claims all rest on common understandings of rationality that are intuitively plausible but ultimately flawed. Contrary to what many people think, we cannot equate rationality with success and non-rationality with failure. Rationality is not about outcomes. Rational actors often fail to achieve their goals, not because of foolish thinking but because of factors they can neither anticipate nor control. There is also a powerful tendency to equate rationality with morality since both qualities are thought to be features of enlightened thinking. But this too is a mistake. Rational policies can violate widely accepted standards of conduct and may even be murderously unjust.

 

 

So what is “rationality” in international politics? Surprisingly, the scholarly literature does not provide a good definition. For us, rationality is all about making sense of the world — that is, figuring out how it works and why — in order to decide how to achieve certain goals. It has both an individual and a collective dimension. Rational policymakers are theory-driven; they are ** theoreticus. They have credible theories — logical explanations based on realistic assumptions and supported by substantial evidence — about the workings of the international system, and they employ these to understand their situation and determine how best to navigate it. Rational states aggregate the views of key policymakers through a deliberative process, one marked by robust and uninhibited debate.
 

https://unherd.com/2023/09/the-russian-invasion-was-a-rational-act/

[Boiler 45,735]

They were thinking maybe in terms of France 1940 etc, or even Barbarossa, it was basically a plan that depended for success on the opponent folding. With no Plan B if they did not.

 

To use the French a Coup de Main.

[Dashinka 24,638]

22 hours ago, Boiler said:

They were thinking maybe in terms of France 1940 etc, or even Barbarossa, it was basically a plan that depended for success on the opponent folding. With no Plan B if they did not.

 

To use the French a Coup de Main.

Not really certain anyone knows what they were thinking.  Most of the analysis we get here in the US or in Western Europe is coming from neo-Cons who are adding their own biases, or they are simply just trying to sound smart.  There was a real red line in Russia, and unlike Obama that talks a big game with lines in the sand, but usually backs down.  It seems many in Europe and the US figured other heads of state would act similarly as they pushed to expand NATO even further.