Ukraine War

[27-25 2,056]

US proxies aren't the only players making moves that favor Russia.

 

[cactusflinthead 27,608]

Fuck Trump and the spineless shitheads that allowed this

[cactusflinthead 27,608]

 

[Anastasis 23,488]

Amazing that there are people here that take David Frum seriously and give that propaganda artist any hearing at all. 

[Captainant 27,854]

2 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Amazing that there are people here that take David Frum seriously and give that propaganda artist any hearing at all. 

Trump singlehandedly torpedoed the most recent Ukrainian aid bill through manipulating the MAGA speaker for the house. It's empirical fact, not a propaganda statement.

[956 Worldwide 34,812]

17 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Trump singlehandedly torpedoed the most recent Ukrainian aid bill through manipulating the MAGA speaker for the house. It's empirical fact, not a propaganda statement.

Ah yes, but have you considered that David Frum noticed this fact? 

[Born to Run 6,569]

Ah yes, but David Frum participates in Society.

[Gil Bang 26,054]

The Polish P.M. 

Edited February 9 by Gil Bang

[956 Worldwide 34,812]

 
Some significant positive movement, although not a done deal by any means. And a majority of GOP senators voted against, which is completely sickening. 
 

And Bernie Sanders. Fuck that guy, I am tired of hearing how he’s different when he does stuff like this because reasons. 

[Pig Bellmont 8,742]

On 2/4/2024 at 4:25 PM, 956 Worldwide said:

Reading the tea leaves I think we are tossing Ukraine overboard.  There won’t be another big package until MAYBE after the general and then only if Trump loses.  This is nearly all the fault of the GOP but the Sullivan approach for the 1.5 years we had was frankly uninspired. 

American foreign policy has gone the way of the nation. Neurotic and timid on the left, insane and hateful from the right. 
 

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/01/15/what-foreign-diplomats-say-about-u-s-politics-behind-closed-doors-00135326 

 

Trump has been Putin’s lap dog from day one, ergo the GOP is Putin’s lap dog by proxy. The only aid we could get against Russia was when Dems controlled both houses of Congress.

 

Edit- I don’t read David Frum. Blind squirrel etc

Edited February 8 by Pig Bellmont

[Dahobbs 17,703]

1 minute ago, Pig Bellmont said:

Trump has been Putin’s lap dog from day one, ergo the GOP is Putin’s lap dog by proxy. The only aid we could get against Russia was when Dems controlled both houses of Congress.

Russia has never done anything wrong or to control American politicians and even if it has it really isn't a bad thing because America is worse. @Anastasis

[Anastasis 23,488]

8 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Russia has never done anything wrong or to control American politicians and even if it has it really isn't a bad thing because America is worse. @Anastasis

Questioning the alignment and/or loyalty of dissenters isn't a particularly novel nor persuasive approach. David Frum made a habit of it during the Iraq war. He would be proud of you DA for dusting off that worn out tactic. His worldview, geopolitical objectives, and tactics are fundamentally unchanged. 

[Dahobbs 17,703]

16 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Questioning the alignment and/or loyalty of dissenters isn't a particularly novel nor persuasive approach. David Frum made a habit of it during the Iraq war. He would be proud of you DA for dusting off that worn out tactic. His worldview, geopolitical objectives, and tactics are fundamentally unchanged. 

I didn't question your alignment. I just think you're an asshole. 

[Anastasis 23,488]

Just now, Dahobbs said:

I didn't question your alignment. I just think you're an asshole. 

Perhaps, but at least I am not a warmongering neocon prick like David Frum. 

[956 Worldwide 34,812]

As someone who feels passionately about peace, it’s important we identify the real problem when it comes to Russia’s war against Ukraine: David Frum. 

[Anastasis 23,488]

6 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

As someone who feels passionately about peace, it’s important we identify the real problem when it comes to Russia’s war against Ukraine: David Frum. 

Neocons like Frum and your girl Toria are cancers. I am sure that you can connect the dots. 

[956 Worldwide 34,812]

It’s not that I support Putin in his quest to wipe out an independent country and murder everyone there who disagrees with him. It’s just that the alternative—vindicating David Frum— is simply a cost we cant accept. 

[956 Worldwide 34,812]

Giving this much of a shit about Toria Nuland is absolutely a tell, the only people who care this much or can even talk about who she is are those who inhabit the rankest fever swamps of Kremlin-aligned propaganda.  It is absolutely hilarious to frame this as some sort of principled stand against David Frum and Toria Nuland. 

[Dahobbs 17,703]

3 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Giving this much of a shit about Toria Nuland is absolutely a tell, the only people who care this much or can even talk about who she is are those who inhabit the rankest fever swamps of Kremlin-aligned propaganda.  It is absolutely hilarious to frame this as some sort of principled stand against David Frum and Toria Nuland. 

To be fair, I don't think @Anastasis has any real principles on this board other than being a contrarian ass. He has generally been better outside of the cloakroom and that's cause here he just likes to troll. 

[Ghost of LL 15,545]

29 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Giving this much of a shit about Toria Nuland is absolutely a tell, the only people who care this much or can even talk about who she is are those who inhabit the rankest fever swamps of Kremlin-aligned propaganda.  It is absolutely hilarious to frame this as some sort of principled stand against David Frum and Toria Nuland. 

Ok--I guess I'll bite.  Fuck . . . I know I'm going to regret this.  Dammit.

 

Who is Toria Nuland?

[Anastasis 23,488]

6 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

Who is Toria Nuland?

A veteran high level #bothsides official in State. Currently acting deputy Secretary of State. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria_Nuland

Maybe you are familiar with her husband, Robert Kagan ( Project for the New American Century)?

 

[David Dennison 18,952]

1 hour ago, Anastasis said:

Neocons like Frum and your girl Toria are cancers. I am sure that you can connect the dots. 

Thank you for your concern.

[956 Worldwide 34,812]

1 hour ago, Ghost of LL said:

Ok--I guess I'll bite.  Fuck . . . I know I'm going to regret this.  Dammit.

 

Who is Toria Nuland?

You gotta get more to understand why anyone cares. She was GWB’s Ambassador to NATO and Assistant Secretary of State for Europe under Obama II. Important but no reason at all for anyone but a deep nerd to know who she was. 
 

That’s why the denizens of Russian fever swamps don’t like her.  During the 2014 Ukraine protests she flew to Kyiv for an official trip and did two things:

1. Brought cookies to the protestors on the square.

2. Got her cell phone tapped by Russians or their (then) Ukrainian client special services. 
 

And she said some pretty non-diplomatic things that the Russians released out of context. One was “fuck the EU.” Second was some frank assessments of who she and the U.S. hoped would emerge from the protests. Which was of course spun as the United States plotting a coup via Toria and cookies. 
 

Again, deep Ukraine lore that no one really knows unless they are all-in on Kremlin propaganda channels. Getting worked up is waving a flag that says “Russian intelligence operations work on me!” 

[Dahobbs 17,703]

13 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

You gotta get more to understand why anyone cares. She was GWB’s Ambassador to NATO and Assistant Secretary of State for Europe under Obama II. Important but no reason at all for anyone but a deep nerd to know who she was. 
 

That’s why the denizens of Russian fever swamps don’t like her.  During the 2014 Ukraine protests she flew to Kyiv for an official trip and did two things:

1. Brought cookies to the protestors on the square.

2. Got her cell phone tapped by Russians or their (then) Ukrainian client special services. 
 

And she said some pretty non-diplomatic things that the Russians released out of context. One was “fuck the EU.” Second was some frank assessments of who she and the U.S. hoped would emerge from the protests. Which was of course spun as the United States plotting a coup via Toria and cookies. 
 

Again, deep Ukraine lore that no one really knows unless they are all-in on Kremlin propaganda channels. Getting worked up is waving a flag that says “Russian intelligence operations work on me!” 

Yup. Personally, I think he got too far into a bit and then legitimately got sucked into elements of it. 

[RomaVicta 30,033]

On 2/7/2024 at 6:40 PM, cactusflinthead said:

Fuck Trump and the spineless shitheads that allowed this

The Americans? Great allies. You can always count on them! 

[wildcat09 29,434]

16 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

To be fair, I don't think @Anastasis has any real principles on this board other than being a contrarian ass. He has generally been better outside of the cloakroom and that's cause here he just likes to troll. 

He's previously said on multiple occasions that he thought Trump should've been impeached after Helsinki. I don't believe he's said exactly what about Helsinki was worthy of impeachment, but I can't imagine he thinks it's something other than it revealed Trump as an obvious Russian asset. Yet he likes to pretend that that's a ridiculous thing to think, even though, you know, this:

[Anastasis 23,488]

It's kinda amazing that in a thread focussed on the war in Ukraine, there are otherwise extremely knowledgeable people here that have never heard of Victoria Nuland. Similarly amazing, but far less surprising, is that our resident State Department propaganda artist thinks that paying attention to the neocons at State that are among the primary influencers of relevant American policy in Ukraine over the last decade is somehow a mark against. 

 

 

[Anastasis 23,488]

30 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

He's previously said on multiple occasions that he thought Trump should've been impeached after Helsinki. I don't believe he's said exactly what about Helsinki was worthy of impeachment, but I can't imagine he thinks it's something other than it revealed Trump as an obvious Russian asset. Yet he likes to pretend that that's a ridiculous thing to think, even though, you know, this:

You don't need to fill in the blanks in your recall with your imagination. If you don't remember, you can use the search function or just ask. 

The rationale was removal via invoking the 25th due to the obvious impairment that his NPD presented to the execution of his office.  

 

[956 Worldwide 34,812]

“I see you want to discuss Ukraine.  To have that discussion we must tell the story of two marriages separated by nigh 1000 years. The first are the nuptials of St. Olga and Igor Rurik, ruler of Kyiv— here begins the Christian baptism of Holy Rus, and the tensions between Northern Rus centered on Novgorod and the lands ruled by Kyiv. 

We shall follow this thread until the wedding of future Brookings fellow Robert Kagan and future Assistant Secretary of State Toria Nuland.

Perhaps then we may discourse on Ukraine intelligently.” 
 

 

 

 

[Anastasis 23,488]

It doesn't require thumbing through the pages of a thousand years of history. It only requires some recall of the modern history most of the posters here lived through during our politically formative years. 

Kagan, co-founder of neocon think tank NPAC with Bill Kristol, played key role in pushing the US to engage the Iraq war. 

Nuland, principal deputy national security advisor to Dick Fn Cheney during the Iraq war.

Maybe we keep an eye on these folks as they continue to influence American foreign policy from their positions of growing bureaucratic power and influence. Or we can just sit by and act surprised while we wonder why the world trends towards looking like a neocon wet dream come to life. 

 

[atomheartbevo 89,847]

1 hour ago, 956 Worldwide said:

“I see you want to discuss Ukraine.  To have that discussion we must tell the story of two marriages separated by nigh 1000 years. The first are the nuptials of St. Olga and Igor Rurik, ruler of Kyiv— here begins the Christian baptism of Holy Rus, and the tensions between Northern Rus centered on Novgorod and the lands ruled by Kyiv. 

Shit, does this mean that Texas has to go back to being a Spanish colony, or even be given back to the Comanches?

[Brisketexan 105,461]

1 hour ago, Anastasis said:

It doesn't require thumbing through the pages of a thousand years of history. It only requires some recall of the modern history most of the posters here lived through during our politically formative years. 

Kagan, co-founder of neocon think tank NPAC with Bill Kristol, played key role in pushing the US to engage the Iraq war. 

Nuland, principal deputy national security advisor to Dick Fn Cheney during the Iraq war.

Maybe we keep an eye on these folks as they continue to influence American foreign policy from their positions of growing bureaucratic power and influence. Or we can just sit by and act surprised while we wonder why the world trends towards looking like a neocon wet dream come to life. 

 

TLDR; what is important here is that we absolve Russia of any responsibility or agency, and that we abandon Ukraine and its people to a horrific fate under the Russian boot.  Because neocons and such.

[Anastasis 23,488]

6 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

TLDR; what is important here is that we absolve Russia of any responsibility or agency, and that we abandon Ukraine and its people to a horrific fate under the Russian boot.  Because neocons and such.

I understand that it takes less effort to make your case counselor if you just blatantly misrepresent the position of others. Not particularly persuasive, but certainly easier. 

Edited February 9 by Anastasis

[Dahobbs 17,703]

18 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I understand that it takes less effort to make your case counselor if you just blatantly misrepresent the position of others. Not particularly persuasive, but certainly easier. 

You never really take a position on anything. You snip, but will rarely, even when pressed, outright state your beliefs. Here for example, I have no idea what you're accomplishing . Do you believe that Russia's invasion of Ukraine is rightful or should be condoned? Do you believe that Russia is not attempting to influence our politicians in order to block further military and economic aid to Ukraine? 

I think the honest answer to both those questions is no. So it boggles my mind why you want to fight over a mid-level bureaucrat's participation as if is remotely important in the broader picture (actually, I know exactly why you do it, to troll).  

Edited February 9 by Dahobbs

[Brisketexan 105,461]

14 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I understand that it takes less effort to make your case counselor if you just blatantly misrepresent the position of others. Not particularly persuasive, but certainly easier. 

When the witness's testimony is solely to 1) denigrate people who speak in support of Ukraine and against Russia/Putin, which 2) naturally and expectedly has the result of eroding support for Ukraine and its citizens....well, we'll let the jury draw their conclusions.  I'm just here with a highlighter to help them along their way.

See, you think that your style is persuasive to.....some end.  The audience actually hearing your testimony, however, is drawing the conclusions your testimony leads people to make.  Want to avoid people reaching that conclusion?  Cool.  Then your testimony should make that clear.

When you answer the question "did you run the red light?" with "traffic signals are all a bullshit plot by the bloodthirsty neocons, and you should be ashamed for citing their work on the hideousness that is traffic signals," then every sane juror in the world is going to conclude "yep, fucker ran the red light."

[Anastasis 23,488]

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

You never really take a position on anything.

Simply not true. Some of y'all have either very poor or very selective memory, or most likely a combination of both. 

2 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Do you believe that Russia's invasion of Ukraine is rightful or should be condoned? Do you believe that Russia is not attempting to influence our politicians in order to block further military and economic aid to Ukraine? 

1) Of course not; 2) Of course Russia is attempting to influence on America's response and the response of others.

 

So now your turn. Do you believe that Russia's actions wrt the invasion of Ukraine in 2022 should be interpreted in a vacuum? Do you think that the post-cold war context is useful to understanding how we got to this position today, and how we can try to avoid similar outcomes in the future? Do you think that America should be exerting their influence to bring the hostilities in Ukraine to an end by engaging negotiations as soon as possible? Do you believe that American financial and military support to Ukraine should have appropriate controls and traceability in place, given the long history of arms running and corruption in the region? Do you think that there is a point where we can reasonably turn down the spigot of taxpayer money and try to find a path forward? Do you think that we are past or close to that point?

My answers are no, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. 

[wildcat09 29,434]

24 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

You never really take a position on anything. You snip, but will rarely, even when pressed, outright state your beliefs. Here for example, I have no idea what you're accomplishing . Do you believe that Russia's invasion of Ukraine is rightful or should be condoned? Do you believe that Russia is not attempting to influence our politicians in order to block further military and economic aid to Ukraine? 

I think the honest answer to both those questions is no. So it boggles my mind why you want to fight over a mid-level bureaucrat's participation as if is remotely important in the broader picture (actually, I know exactly why you do it, to troll).  

He came pretty close to taking a real position once, though that position he almost stated was "the Bucha massacre was good, actually," so I'm not sure he deserves credit.

[Dahobbs 17,703]

6 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Simply not true. Some of y'all have either very poor or very selective memory, or most likely a combination of both. 

1) Of course not; 2) Of course Russia is attempting to influence on America's response and the response of others.

Yes, it is. I've gone back and forth with you numerous times struggling to get you to state your position. You know it. But I do appreciate you at least answering here.

Quote

 

So now your turn. Do you believe that Russia's actions wrt the invasion of Ukraine in 2022 should be interpreted in a vacuum? Do you think that the post-cold war context is useful to understanding how we got to this position today, and how we can try to avoid similar outcomes in the future? Do you think that America should be exerting their influence to bring the hostilities in Ukraine to an end by engaging negotiations as soon as possible? Do you believe that American financial and military support to Ukraine should have appropriate controls and traceability in place, given the long history of arms running and corruption in the region? Do you think that there is a point where we can reasonably turn down the spigot of taxpayer money and try to find a path forward? Do you think that we are past or close to that point?

My answers are no, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. 

 

1) Do you believe that Russia's actions wrt the invasion of Ukraine in 2022 should be interpreted in a vacuum?

No, but I don't find it relevant to the current discussion. If you want to have an academic debate of how Russia ended up like Russia, start a new thread.

2) Do you think that the post-cold war context is useful to understanding how we got to this position today, and how we can try to avoid similar outcomes in the future?

I have no idea what this means. 

3) Do you think that America should be exerting their influence to bring the hostilities in Ukraine to an end by engaging negotiations as soon as possible?

No, I don't think it is for the United States to negotiate on behalf of Ukraine. Unless Ukraine wants to cede territory, the only negotiation should be Russia leaving and paying for the damage it has done. Stop doing Russia's work for it. 

4) Do you believe that American financial and military support to Ukraine should have appropriate controls and traceability in place, given the long history of arms running and corruption in the region?

Your question implies that such controls don't exist and that current aid isn't being used appropriately. There is absolutely zero evidence of that and it has been addressed many times. This is a Russia propaganda talking point and you know it. 

5) Do you think that there is a point where we can reasonably turn down the spigot of taxpayer money and try to find a path forward?

This is a meaningless question along the lines of "is it possible." Sure, anything is possible. For instance, Russia could withdraw at once and start paying reparations for its crimes. Once Ukraine is rebuilt, foreign aid wouldn't be necessary anymore. 

6) Do you think that we are past or close to that point?

Not even close. The only people that do are Russian tools trying to find a way to let Russia keep its ill-gotten gains. I'm unsurprised to find you in that camp. You've jumped in the Kremlin propaganda pool and appear unable to swim out. 

[Brisketexan 105,461]

15 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Simply not true. Some of y'all have either very poor or very selective memory, or most likely a combination of both. 

1) Of course not; 2) Of course Russia is attempting to influence on America's response and the response of others.

 

So now your turn. Do you believe that Russia's actions wrt the invasion of Ukraine in 2022 should be interpreted in a vacuum? Do you think that the post-cold war context is useful to understanding how we got to this position today, and how we can try to avoid similar outcomes in the future? Do you think that America should be exerting their influence to bring the hostilities in Ukraine to an end by engaging negotiations as soon as possible? Do you believe that American financial and military support to Ukraine should have appropriate controls and traceability in place, given the long history of arms running and corruption in the region? Do you think that there is a point where we can reasonably turn down the spigot of taxpayer money and try to find a path forward? Do you think that we are past or close to that point?

My answers are no, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. 

1. No.

2. Yes.....but it's a loaded fucking question, because your purpose is to lay 100% responsibility at the feet of the US and the West, and functionally zero at the feet of Russia.  You don't get to say "sure, he was wrong to hit her, but she was asking for it and she kept provoking him and she burned his toast and you know how fucking mad he gets over burned toast."  Fuck that shit, when it becomes an exercise in excusing and enabling Russia.  If it's a good-faith post-mortem with hindsight to learn lessons for the future, sure.  But that's not the kind of exercise you have ever engaged in around here.  You have eyes for one conclusion and one conclusion only: whatever bad thing we're talking about, it's America's fault.  Even the bad guys in any given scenario really have no blame or agency, because America made them do it.  

3. Maybe.  "Bringing hostilities to an end" is not fucking "peace."  The absence of war is not peace.  The purpose of negotiations should be towards an actual peace.  "Peace" means Ukraine remains Ukraine.  It means an end to Russian aggression in the region.  Sometimes, and this really really sucks, the way to finish a fight is to fucking finish it.

4. Yes.  And so far, while NOTHING is perfect (I challenge you to set up a perfectly functioning bureaucracy in a combat zone), the "loss rate" on weapons and other transfers appears to be in an acceptable range.  You'll never get to zero -- for fuck's sake, troops have stolen from the quartermaster in every war known to man.

5.  Yes.  But we're not there yet.  Not even close.  The bang for our buck we are getting for our tax dollars (most of them long-since spent, by the way - we're spending very few NEW dollars supplying Ukraine, relatively speaking) is mindblowingly good.  With mostly surplus materiel, we have been and are contributing to the destruction of the Russian military as a fighting force able to project power on a broad front.  If you'd like to bring up the cost in Ukrainian lives, and the fact that this war can and may be fought "to the last Ukrainian," that's a damned fair and awful point.  But in my mind, the answer to that is up to them.  Would we fight for our land "to the last American?"  I mean, setting aside that half of us would fucking line up to support Putin, yes, we would.  How hard Ukraine wants to fight, and how much they want to sacrifice, should be up to them.

There's always shit to learn.  There are always going to be things we (and others) did wrong, and should learn from in the future.  Shit, my family has one experience in Ukraine -- ONE -- and it included us being the victim of a crime (had shit stolen from us at the airport in Kyiv, which was a corrupt craphole at the time).  Of importance, among the new generation of Ukrainians that my kids have befriended, when they hear that story, they are, to a person, mortified.  They have all insisted that when the war is over, we should go back, and see how much they have changed since then.  Yes, geopolitics, nations, and people are complex, and should be evaluated and understood with an eye for all the facts.  But for fuck's sake, sometimes, there's a clear fucking bad actor, who has announced his plain intentions for continued bad actions including genocide, and we should fucking act to stop that shit.  It doesn't mean everyone else is an angel if you determine that one party is indeed a fucking devil.

[956 Worldwide 34,812]

Anastasis:

Quote

So now your turn. Do you believe that Russia's actions wrt the invasion of Ukraine in 2022 should be interpreted in a vacuum? Do you think that the post-cold war context is useful to understanding how we got to this position today, and how we can try to avoid similar outcomes in the future

Vladimir Putin:

”Well Tucker, let me explain the situation to you.  Ukraine isn’t real, it was invented by the perfidious Poles and then the Austro-Hungarian General Staff invented the Ukrainian language. But in fact, Ukrainians want to be Russian as these 17th century letters from Bohdan Khmelnytsky clearly show. So of course Russia has a right to it.”

BuT tHe ImF aNd NaTo

What bad-faith fucking questions.  Not even letting VVP speak for himself. Pointless to even begin to engage, as soon as you do it’s more gibberish. 

[atomheartbevo 89,847]

Putin is telling everybody that he won’t stop if he gets Ukraine. He did it with this interview, he’s done it with his writings, he’s done it with his speeches.  Say what you want about Putin, but he tells you who he is.

At the end of the day, we can let Ukrainians fight and die against the Russians, or we can let Putin take Ukraine and resign ourselves to the fact that it will be Americans soldiers fighting and dying against Russians in the future, and we can pray that nukes don’t get involved.  

Edited February 10 by atomheartbevo

[Anastasis 23,488]

7 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

1) Do you believe that Russia's actions wrt the invasion of Ukraine in 2022 should be interpreted in a vacuum?

No, but I don't find it relevant to the current discussion. If you want to have an academic debate of how Russia ended up like Russia, start a new thread.

OK. I disagree, but I understand that a short attention span is helpful when it comes to making sense of American foreign policy.

7 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

2) Do you think that the post-cold war context is useful to understanding how we got to this position today, and how we can try to avoid similar outcomes in the future?

I have no idea what this means. 

I am sorry, but again, I understand. 

7 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

3) Do you think that America should be exerting their influence to bring the hostilities in Ukraine to an end by engaging negotiations as soon as possible?

No, I don't think it is for the United States to negotiate on behalf of Ukraine. Unless Ukraine wants to cede territory, the only negotiation should be Russia leaving and paying for the damage it has done. Stop doing Russia's work for it. 

You don't think that America should exert influence in working towards negotiation between Russia and Ukraine, but have no problem with America and other western allies exerting influence to stop negotiations between the parties. That checks out. 

7 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

4) Do you believe that American financial and military support to Ukraine should have appropriate controls and traceability in place, given the long history of arms running and corruption in the region?

Your question implies that such controls don't exist and that current aid isn't being used appropriately. There is absolutely zero evidence of that and it has been addressed many times. This is a Russia propaganda talking point and you know it. 

What you call a Russian propaganda talking point was a very broadly accepted mainstream view among Western countries and media only a few years ago, and well, just reality based in general. It takes a special kinda ostriching to insist that we should just accept that DOD oversight and controls are working, with no scrutiny. I mean, it's not like we don't have decades and reams of evidence regarding DOD audit and control failures. 

But just one example for your consumption, relevant to this theatre, from last month: https://apnews.com/article/ukraine-weapons-audit-watchdog-us-congress-biden-9abecd14528b9551ff4ddb6786ad7fda

WASHINGTON (AP) — Shortfalls in required monitoring by American officials mean the U.S. cannot track more than $1 billion in weapons and military equipment provided to Ukraine to fight invading Russian forces, according to a Pentagon audit released Thursday.

The findings mean that 59% of $1.7 billion in defense gear that the U.S. has provided Ukraine and was directed to guard against misuse or theft remained “delinquent,” the report by the Defense Department’s office of the inspector-general, the watchdog body for the Pentagon, said.

7 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

5) Do you think that there is a point where we can reasonably turn down the spigot of taxpayer money and try to find a path forward?

This is a meaningless question along the lines of "is it possible." Sure, anything is possible. For instance, Russia could withdraw at once and start paying reparations for its crimes. Once Ukraine is rebuilt, foreign aid wouldn't be necessary anymore. 

LOL. Ok. 

7 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

6) Do you think that we are past or close to that point?

Not even close. The only people that do are Russian tools trying to find a way to let Russia keep its ill-gotten gains. I'm unsurprised to find you in that camp. You've jumped in the Kremlin propaganda pool and appear unable to swim out. 

A growing number of Americans disagree with you. From late last year: https://news.gallup.com/poll/513680/american-views-ukraine-war-charts.aspx# I understand that you think they are all Russian tools, drowning in propaganda. But if you could struggle to get your head above the waterline for a moment, you might realize who is the one that is in struggle mode and weighed down by propaganda. 

 

Responses merged. 

 

 

6 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

1. No.

Thank God for at least one succinct response between the two of you. 

6 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

2. Yes.....but it's a loaded fucking question, because your purpose is to lay 100% responsibility at the feet of the US and the West, and functionally zero at the feet of Russia.  You don't get to say "sure, he was wrong to hit her, but she was asking for it and she kept provoking him and she burned his toast and you know how fucking mad he gets over burned toast."  Fuck that shit, when it becomes an exercise in excusing and enabling Russia.  If it's a good-faith post-mortem with hindsight to learn lessons for the future, sure.  But that's not the kind of exercise you have ever engaged in around here.  You have eyes for one conclusion and one conclusion only: whatever bad thing we're talking about, it's America's fault.  Even the bad guys in any given scenario really have no blame or agency, because America made them do it.  

The only loading here is your hyperbolic strawman argumentation. Oh, I'll be here for the post-mortem. I only wish that some of you would have learned something from any of the prior ones. Maybe next time, I guess.

6 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

3. Maybe.  "Bringing hostilities to an end" is not fucking "peace."  The absence of war is not peace.  The purpose of negotiations should be towards an actual peace.  "Peace" means Ukraine remains Ukraine.  It means an end to Russian aggression in the region.  Sometimes, and this really really sucks, the way to finish a fight is to fucking finish it.

I was just told by DAHobbs that we should let Ukraine negotiate on behalf of Ukraine without US influence. I am ok with that. I know that it might hurt the inner jingos of the brave proxy warmongers, but you will get over it. 

6 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

4. Yes.  And so far, while NOTHING is perfect (I challenge you to set up a perfectly functioning bureaucracy in a combat zone), the "loss rate" on weapons and other transfers appears to be in an acceptable range.  You'll never get to zero -- for fuck's sake, troops have stolen from the quartermaster in every war known to man.

Response per above, but I am happy to leave this one to the post-mortem as well. No matter the results, not sure that y'all will learn anything from it, yet again. 

6 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

5.  Yes.  But we're not there yet.  Not even close.  The bang for our buck we are getting for our tax dollars (most of them long-since spent, by the way - we're spending very few NEW dollars supplying Ukraine, relatively speaking) is mindblowingly good.  With mostly surplus materiel, we have been and are contributing to the destruction of the Russian military as a fighting force able to project power on a broad front.  If you'd like to bring up the cost in Ukrainian lives, and the fact that this war can and may be fought "to the last Ukrainian," that's a damned fair and awful point.  But in my mind, the answer to that is up to them.  Would we fight for our land "to the last American?"  I mean, setting aside that half of us would fucking line up to support Putin, yes, we would.  How hard Ukraine wants to fight, and how much they want to sacrifice, should be up to them.

Similar response to above. I do appreciate your additional considerations, even if you sound exactly like Lindsey Graham. Agree wrt Ukrainian self-determination.

Edited February 10 by Anastasis

[Dahobbs 17,703]

58 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

OK. I disagree, but I understand that a short attention span is helpful when it comes to making sense of American foreign policy.

I am sorry, but again, I understand. 

You don't think that America should exert influence in working towards negotiation between Russia and Ukraine, but have no problem with America and other western allies exerting influence to stop negotiations between the parties. That checks out. 

What you call a Russian propaganda talking point was a very broadly accepted mainstream view among Western countries and media only a few years ago, and well, just reality based in general. It takes a special kinda ostriching to insist that we should just accept that DOD oversight and controls are working, with no scrutiny. I mean, it's not like we don't have decades and reams of evidence regarding DOD audit and control failures. 

But just one example for your consumption, relevant to this theatre, from last month: https://apnews.com/article/ukraine-weapons-audit-watchdog-us-congress-biden-9abecd14528b9551ff4ddb6786ad7fda

WASHINGTON (AP) — Shortfalls in required monitoring by American officials mean the U.S. cannot track more than $1 billion in weapons and military equipment provided to Ukraine to fight invading Russian forces, according to a Pentagon audit released Thursday.

The findings mean that 59% of $1.7 billion in defense gear that the U.S. has provided Ukraine and was directed to guard against misuse or theft remained “delinquent,” the report by the Defense Department’s office of the inspector-general, the watchdog body for the Pentagon, said.

LOL. Ok. 

A growing number of Americans disagree with you. From late last year: https://news.gallup.com/poll/513680/american-views-ukraine-war-charts.aspx# I understand that you think they are all Russian tools, drowning in propaganda. But if you could struggle to get your head above the waterline for a moment, you might realize who is the one that is in struggle mode and weighed down by propaganda. 

 

Responses merged. 

 

 

Thank God for at least one succinct response between the two of you. 

The only loading here is your hyperbolic strawman argumentation. Oh, I'll be here for the post-mortem. I only wish that some of you would have learned something from any of the prior ones. Maybe next time, I guess.

I was just told by DAHobbs that we should let Ukraine negotiate on behalf of Ukraine without US influence. I am ok with that. I know that it might hurt the inner jingos of the brave proxy warmongers, but you will get over it. 

Response per above, but I am happy to leave this one to the post-mortem as well. No matter the results, not sure that y'all will learn anything from it, yet again. 

Similar response to above. I do appreciate your additional considerations, even if you sound exactly like Lindsey Graham. Agree wrt Ukrainian self-determination.

Again, you're a Russian tool, intentionally or not. I don't really care. You know you're full of shit. 

[Anastasis 23,488]

12 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Again, you're a Russian tool, intentionally or not. I don't really care. You know you're full of shit. 

Good talk, you mush brained bot. 

[Captainant 27,854]

In a thread about the Ukraine war, in which annie is defending the position that trump did NOT torpedo the recent border and Ukraine bill and that such an argument is mere propaganda:

 

 

[Anastasis 23,488]

1 minute ago, Captainant said:

In a thread about the Ukraine war, in which annie is defending the position that trump did NOT torpedo the recent border and Ukraine bill and that such an argument is mere propaganda:

 

[RomaVicta 30,033]

3 hours ago, longhornmatt said:

Even if you aren’t persuaded for other reasons to stop a tyrant from invading an innocent neighbor and massacring millions of people, this has been the obvious realpolitik issue all along.  Putin has done it in Georgia, and Ukraine (twice), Belarus is a vassal state, etc.  Appeasement and easy victories means he keeps going down the list, which eventually gets you to a NATO member, and probably not that far into the future.  

It’s much better for us in every way to make Russia more cautious by funding Ukraine in a proxy war that hurts than to find out what happens when an emboldened Putin turns his attention to the Baltics.

What will he continue his conquests with? He's just about destroyed his army in Ukraine without yet achieving victory.

That sounds like a rationale for abandoning Ukraine because we've already won by diminishing Russia's military and removing horror of the Red Army. I'm not in the least for abandoning Ukraine. We're finally backing a possible winner who is determined to fight and bleed our second most powerful rival. I also despise invaders.

The GOP should be facing mob violence for their alignment with Vlad Putin. The electorate is still the problem. No passion or involvement in issues of the day.

[atomheartbevo 89,847]

3 hours ago, Anastasis said:

You don't think that America should exert influence in working towards negotiation between Russia and Ukraine

You should probably spend a few minutes and read up on what Putin has written about Ukraine, or watch his speeches or interviews.  There is no “negotiation” with Putin. He will not accept anything short of annexing Ukraine as a whole.  That is it.  He gets what he wants and accepts nothing less.

He and his state media talking heads who spend hours on Russian state media talk shows every night, have made it abundantly clear that any cease fire arrangements are just putting off the inevitable, and that Russia will take Ukraine eventually, and then they’ll start looking at the Baltics.  

When the man tells you that he will not stop unless Ukraine is brought under his control and that he will recreate the Soviet Union, listen to him.

[Dahobbs 17,703]

8 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Good talk, you mush brained bot. 

You're totally a smart man and not a disingenuous shit stain. 

[Anastasis 23,488]

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

You're totally a smart man and not a disingenuous shit stain. 

You seem particularly fragile, and fold up easily to run back to your blankey.