Do you think the US military should protect Ukraine?

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

10 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

Bigger problem for all Americans is the dishonesty from politicians on why gas/anything prices go up.

Yeah because if there’s anything this simulation has shown us it’s that we will NOT put up with politicians that lie.

GTFO man.

[Armybrat 40844]

I voted no, but would’ve done the 3rd option sans special ops on the ground.

[52-80 19158]

16 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

Yeah because if there’s anything this simulation has shown us it’s that we will NOT put up with politicians that lie.

GTFO man.

"People put up with lying politicians before, so it's okay for me to do the same.  Especially when they're from my party"

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

Just now, 52-80 said:

"People put up with lying politicians before, so it's okay for me to do the same.  Especially when they're from my party"

Who is…Wayne Gretzky?

[phdhorn 6224]

1 hour ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

That's what I'm talkin about.

Fair enough. But after 3-4 Ukrainian beers (okay, maybe 30-40), it's more like this: 

Edited February 25, 2022 by phdhorn

[Wulaw Horn 19070]

Honestly?  If I was in the military I have no doubt I would be fine with going over there. A few of my law school buddies are military (one a former captain on the marines- one an active duty full bird in the army) and they see it as a righteous fight we should be down for (and they didn’t feel that way about Iraq after about a week). I’d be ok with my kid going over there for that. I would have been active military and just finishing up my 20th year this year if I’d not gotten engaged when I did in law school (interned with Jag- intended to make that my career which was why I went to law school). 
Every time we deploy somewhere it’s a sliding door moment for me as I wonder what that would be like and if I would have been ok with whatever we are doing. I think I would be just fine with that here. It seems like it’s worth fighting for. I get why other people would draw other conclusions. 

[52-80 19158]

4 minutes ago, phdhorn said:

Fair enough. But after 3-4 Ukrainian beers (okay, maybe 30-40), it's more like this: 

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

3 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Honestly?  If I was in the military I have no doubt I would be fine with going over there. A few of my law school buddies are military (one a former captain on the marines- one an active duty full bird in the army) and they see it as a righteous fight we should be down for (and they didn’t feel that way about Iraq after about a week). I’d be ok with my kid going over there for that. I would have been active military and just finishing up my 20th year this year if I’d not gotten engaged when I did in law school (interned with Jag- intended to make that my career which was why I went to law school). 
Every time we deploy somewhere it’s a sliding door moment for me as I wonder what that would be like and if I would have been ok with whatever we are doing. I think I would be just fine with that here. It seems like it’s worth fighting for. I get why other people would draw other conclusions. 

IMO it's winnable with a very clear mission: destroy Putin's fighting forces engaged in attacking a sovereign nation. Our recent military excursions were not definable, nor winnable.

We can end the world of this evil fuck.

[DDD Dad 14339]

1 hour ago, bernorange said:

I heard a lot about the 1994 de-nuclearization agreement that the USA et al signed when Ukraine gave up their nukes.  I searched around and found the text of the agreement posted here (it's probably posted elsewhere too, but I didn't bother searching for multiple copies of it):

https://web.archive.org/web/20170312052208/http://www.cfr.org/nonproliferation-arms-control-and-disarmament/budapest-memorandums-security-assurances-1994/p32484

I was surprised to see that the extent of the security assurances in the event that Ukraine were attacked was simply to "seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine".  We don't have any obligation to engage our military in defense of Ukraine.

Engaging our military in Ukraine would be an escalation and the downstream consequences could be {Egon]bad[/Egon].  I don't think we should be engaging our military in Ukraine.  But we should be leading the charge amongst the civilized world in treating Russia as a pariah.  No pussy footing around with sanctions.  Full teeth.  Any and every legal rock overturned to seize Russian assets held in foreign lands. Full travel restrictions.  Russian passports no good anywhere.  Remove Russia from any position of power within the UN and similar NGOs.

It wouldn't upset me if certain pipelines (NS1 et al) eminating from Russia starting having severe maintenance issues outside of Russian territory to where they couldn't deliver energy to Europe.  Europe would suffer, but they need to pay the price to kill the beast.  Fuck 'em (Russia).

This is my issue.  What promises were in fact made to Ukraine for it to give up its nukes (albeit nukes that Moscow exclusively controlled)?

 

I've read that while the actual agreement only provides that we won't attack them, apparently there were promises made that we would come to their aid if Russia were to come after them.  What that entails isn't clear.  If the details are as you describe, then I'm firmly in the hell no category (though I'd want to provide arms, training, etc., $, etc. to the extent possible outside of Ukraine).

[DDD Dad 14339]

9 minutes ago, phdhorn said:

Fair enough. But after 3-4 Ukrainian beers (okay, maybe 30-40), it's more like this: 

1,1,1,1

[Brisketexan 105139]

My buddy's uncle (Ranger in Vietnam) told of multiple occasions when he ended up in a firefight with tall european dudes on the other side.  Don't know how up to date y'all are on ethnic features, but most Vietnamese are not tall and blonde.

Wouldn't be the first time the Cold War adversaries had their own boots on the ground in a proxy war.

[Mole 4333]

Yes to weapons, supplies, money, intelligence, and advice for Ukraine.

Yes to any and all sanctions for Russia.

No to any physical involvement.

[GTNY 284]

Why do so many people draw the line on NATO countries? Is it because we have an agreement with them? We should 100% be there to prevent future nuclear proliferation. 

[MissingInAction 25076]

If you think we don't have "advisors" in Ukraine then you haven't been paying attention to US SOP for 50 years.

[52-80 19158]

11 minutes ago, GTNY said:

Why do so many people draw the line on NATO countries? Is it because we have an agreement with them? We should 100% be there to prevent future nuclear proliferation. 

That is ostensibly the answer.  On one hand, word is bond.  It's the basis of trust for agreements going forward.  On the other hand, it's like... why dig into the legalese of old text (e.g. what triggers Article 5) when it's literally fucking war

[52-80 19158]

Just now, MissingInAction said:

If you think we don't have "advisors" in Ukraine then you haven't been paying attention to US SOP for 50 years.

we did have hunter for a while

[Blotto 23509]

4 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

we did have hunter for a while

I think its time to send in the big guns

we wanna get this shit solved or not? 

Edited February 25, 2022 by Blotto

[52-80 19158]

1 minute ago, Blotto said:

I think its time to send in the big guns

we wanna get this shit solved or not? 

are those ray bans shatter-proof?

[MissingInAction 25076]

The Kush!

[midtown 3345]

Just make the entire planet drive electric vehicles and then Russia will have no other income and collapse.  Easy peasy.

[ROFL BOX 6649]

4 hours ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

I'm open to it, but only if our boys are able to war some cool Spanish Civil War - era guerrilla garb.

Don't you mean this one?

[Wulaw Horn 19070]

1 hour ago, midtown said:

Just make the entire planet drive electric vehicles and then Russia will have no other income and collapse.  Easy peasy.

Those require a ton of rare earth metals right?  China has that market pretty cornered. Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss. 

[Brothahorn 10087]

Those require a ton of rare earth metals right?  China has that market pretty cornered. Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss. 

Da!

[52-80 19158]

20 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Those require a ton of rare earth metals right?  China has that market pretty cornered. Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss. 

Lithium and Cobalt for most of the battery formulation. Its bottom right on the chart. 

[HoustonHorn 1062]

35 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

Lithium and Cobalt for most of the battery formulation. Its bottom right on the chart. 

I'm of the very strong opinion we need to be recycling these Lithium-Ion batteries and investing heavily in the companies that do this. And by we, I mean AMYZF and by investing heavily, I mean Tesla should buy AMYZF for about $10/share or more. Perfect time for independence from China, and by that I mean my independence from my employment. @Harrison Stafford agrees.

[maninblack 7974]

2 hours ago, midtown said:

Just make the entire planet drive electric vehicles and then Russia will have no other income and collapse.  Easy peasy.

Not a very green solution

[Auto Driller 2505]

7 hours ago, Pescado_Rojo said:

Provide weapons, have SF troops in Poland and neighboring countries providing insurgency training. No boots...even SF boots...on the ground in country. If he invades a NATO country, he gets the all you can eat platter. 

This right here. I voted for option 3 but only because it was closest to what I think makes sense. Provide lethal and non-lethal aid, training, and intelligence support. No boots on the ground or planes in the sky.

[Harrison Stafford 3335]

2 hours ago, HoustonHorn said:

I'm of the very strong opinion we need to be recycling these Lithium-Ion batteries and investing heavily in the companies that do this. And by we, I mean AMYZF and by investing heavily, I mean Tesla should buy AMYZF for about $10/share or more. Perfect time for independence from China, and by that I mean my independence from my employment. @Harrison Stafford agrees.

Indeed, I do.  Have 150,000 shares of AMYZF at an avg. cost of .85/shr.  https://americanmanganeseinc.com/.  When I sell north of $10/shr, drinks are on me.  And we’re talking the good stuff.

[FORTY NINE TO ZERO 2652]

no. but setup a depot right across the polish border and let them take anything  they need. 

[Wally Fairway 5550]

Those who say do nothing, or it is Europe's problem, or Putin only wants the two provinces... I say  congrats you win the Neville Chamberlain award.

I say direct cyber attacks, air cover  for a no fly zone, and weapons with support and be clear where our support is located and the consequences of fucking with our forces. Putin has started he wants to bring the  nation states from the USSR back together under the Russian flag. 

He is doing it as a slowskreig, instead of a blitzkrieg. First it was Georgia, the Crimea, now the second bite at Ukraine, when do you say stop? Estonia, Finland, the 'stan countries?

And yes I think he is unstable enough to use "tactical" nukes. And to think for years we were told with about a terrorist with a lone dirty bomb.

[Eastwood 4394]

slowskreig

I like "tripskreig," personally. Rhymes with the original better. Maybe we should trademark it for shirts. You heard it here first.

[USNALonghorn 5078]

23 minutes ago, Wally Fairway said:

Those who say do nothing, or it is Europe's problem, or Putin only wants the two provinces... I say  congrats you win the Neville Chamberlain award.

I say direct cyber attacks, air cover  for a no fly zone, and weapons with support and be clear where our support is located and the consequences of fucking with our forces. Putin has started he wants to bring the  nation states from the USSR back together under the Russian flag. 

He is doing it as a slowskreig, instead of a blitzkrieg. First it was Georgia, the Crimea, now the second bite at Ukraine, when do you say stop? Estonia, Finland, the 'stan countries?

And yes I think he is unstable enough to use "tactical" nukes. And to think for years we were told with about a terrorist with a lone dirty bomb.

Neville Chamberlain was an example of European appeasement, not American. Also NATO didn’t exist. 

Russia under is Putin is a far cry from Nazi Germany’s war machine. If they touch a NATO country, they’ll get far more than they can handle.

This is about America learning a lesson it has failed to learn throughout history: “The enemy of your enemy isn’t always your friend”. We keep getting involved in bullshit that wastes lives, billions of dollars, and decades, only to leave things in a similar or worse state. 

We should honor NATO and other actual alliances. However we should stop playing world police.

[SL Xpress 7513]

12 hours ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Yep. The only reason we they aren’t in NATO isn’t because they didn’t want in. 
I have a soft spot in my heart for all the Eastern European countries that struggled under communism and so desperately want out of Russias shower of influence. 
This isn’t us going into the Middle East or Asia and taking alien cultures and trying to Americanize them which pretty clearly doesn’t work. These are people that desperately want to be like us/want what we have and are willing to die to try to make sure they have it and aren’t subject to the jack boot of the Russian thug. 
I can’t not be in favor of giving people there freedom for it when they are begging for it and willing to die for it. 

Probably not the thread for it, but actually the US did a pretty damn good job with Japan and South Korea, and while Singapore was never a US occupation of any sort, English is the official language because of the US. I'm not saying any of them were Americanized, per se, but if the US had done as good a job as an occupying force in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Vietnam as it did with the Southern United States, West Germany/Berlin, Japan and South Korea, the world would be a much different place right now. For the better. Not trying to force a discussion about it. I of course understand the massive differences between Iraq/Afghanistan/Vietnam and the other occupations. But I also wanted to counter your brief assertion about "This isn’t us going into...Asia and taking alien cultures and trying to Americanize them which pretty clearly doesn’t work."

[SL Xpress 7513]

The time to have US troops crossing the Ukraine border has passed. I wish that wasn't so, but that's the way it is.

Anyone who is claiming Putin wouldn't use nuclear weapons in that event doesn't understand the mindset to get to the position he's in.

Think about it as a game of chicken, with both contestants barreling muscle cars head first towards one another. If you're committed to winning - I mean really committed to winning - you turn off the option in your head to steer away no matter what. I can't speak for anyone else, but I know beyond a doubt I have that switch. There are situations where you just can't bluff. You say something in a confrontational situation, you have to mean it. Hopefully the other side senses that conviction and backs down, but if they don't, oh well.

I did not make all the different choices Putin has to rise up through the ranks of the KGB, and whatever compromises that entailed. I did not figure out a way to ingratiate myself to Boris Yeltsin and convince him I would be a good moderate to inherit the reins of power after him. I did not figure out a way to coerce powerful crime bosses to back me, and then ruin/assassinate the ones who weren't sufficiently loyal. I did not figure out a way to circumvent the constitution by having a puppet succeed me as President, and then compel the Federal Assembly to install me as president for life for all intents and purposes. I did not eliminate any legitimate political rival by jailing them, killing them, or otherwise discrediting them. I do not see myself as almost a messianic figure as it pertains to not just Russia, but traditional, stereotypical values of masculinity.

For those of you who say let's enforce a no fly zone, or let's send US troops in, or let's send special ops in, I will tell you with all the conviction I can muster that there's a very good possibility you're ending the human race. 

[SL Xpress 7513]

11 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

My buddy's uncle (Ranger in Vietnam) told of multiple occasions when he ended up in a firefight with tall european dudes on the other side.  Don't know how up to date y'all are on ethnic features, but most Vietnamese are not tall and blonde.

Wouldn't be the first time the Cold War adversaries had their own boots on the ground in a proxy war.

There's no doubt Russians were flying MiGs in both Korea and Vietnam. But the US chose to pretend like they weren't, and the Russians did severely limit their involvement from that perspective. The Russians acknowledged having trainers assigned to the North Vietnamese. Obviously some of them extended their training to the point of abusing the term. 

It was a different time, though. You wouldn't be able to get away with that any more. At least not in Ukraine. This isn't Vietnam to Putin. This isn't even Mexico. It's more like taking back Plymouth Rock. 

[immamac 42850]

1 hour ago, SL Xpress said:

The time to have US troops crossing the Ukraine border has passed. I wish that wasn't so, but that's the way it is.

Anyone who is claiming Putin wouldn't use nuclear weapons in that event doesn't understand the mindset to get to the position he's in.

Think about it as a game of chicken, with both contestants barreling muscle cars head first towards one another. If you're committed to winning - I mean really committed to winning - you turn off the option in your head to steer away no matter what. I can't speak for anyone else, but I know beyond a doubt I have that switch. There are situations where you just can't bluff. You say something in a confrontational situation, you have to mean it. Hopefully the other side senses that conviction and backs down, but if they don't, oh well.

I did not make all the different choices Putin has to rise up through the ranks of the KGB, and whatever compromises that entailed. I did not figure out a way to ingratiate myself to Boris Yeltsin and convince him I would be a good moderate to inherit the reins of power after him. I did not figure out a way to coerce powerful crime bosses to back me, and then ruin/assassinate the ones who weren't sufficiently loyal. I did not figure out a way to circumvent the constitution by having a puppet succeed me as President, and then compel the Federal Assembly to install me as president for life for all intents and purposes. I did not eliminate any legitimate political rival by jailing them, killing them, or otherwise discrediting them. I do not see myself as almost a messianic figure as it pertains to not just Russia, but traditional, stereotypical values of masculinity.

For those of you who say let's enforce a no fly zone, or let's send US troops in, or let's send special ops in, I will tell you with all the conviction I can muster that there's a very good possibility you're ending the human race. 

The fact that you think Russia still has nukes worth a shit after this shit show disaster makes me kind of laugh. There's 0 chance I would believe that Russia has the capability of a successful nuclear strike and that their defense systems are anywhere good enough to intercept the rebuttal of launching and failing.

[SL Xpress 7513]

1 minute ago, immamac said:

The fact that you think Russia still has nukes worth a shit after this shit show disaster makes me kind of laugh. There's 0 chance I would believe that Russia has the capability of a successful nuclear strike and that their defense systems are anywhere good enough to intercept the rebuttal of launching and failing.

 

Sweet. Let's find out then.

[immamac 42850]

Just now, SL Xpress said:

 

Sweet. Let's find out then.

Let's absolutely not find out. Nuking Russia would be so terrible, but our nukes for damn sure still work. We need to stay the fuck out of this directly it's not our fight - if Russia starts going unhinged it would be better to get the Russian people or military to revolt than it would be to eradicate the Russian forces. I think Putin and some cronies going away and Russia is a great contributing member to the global economy. 

[SL Xpress 7513]

1 minute ago, immamac said:

Let's absolutely not find out. Nuking Russia would be so terrible, but our nukes for damn sure still work. We need to stay the fuck out of this directly it's not our fight - if Russia starts going unhinged it would be better to get the Russian people or military to revolt than it would be to eradicate the Russian forces. I think Putin and some cronies going away and Russia is a great contributing member to the global economy. 

I don't understand your point, then. How much does it matter whether their nuclear weapons work or not if we're not willing to test it? At that point it serves the same purpose.

And no one is talking about nuking Russia except as a retaliation. All I'm saying is that if NATO/US forces cross that border, Putin is going to nuke. He'll go full on first strike. It might be a tactical nuke, but even that's a risk in escalation I'm personally not willing to support.

I don't believe it's nearly as easy as you say regarding Russia. But that's DEFINITELY not the purview of this thread. But if you or anyone else wants to talk about Russia's place in the world economy post Putin on a different thread, I'm all for it. 

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

3 hours ago, immamac said:

The fact that you think Russia still has nukes worth a shit after this shit show disaster makes me kind of laugh. There's 0 chance I would believe that Russia has the capability of a successful nuclear strike and that their defense systems are anywhere good enough to intercept the rebuttal of launching and failing.

Your Russia takes are even worse than your football takes. Which, frankly, I didn’t even think was possible.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

3 hours ago, immamac said:

Let's absolutely not find out. Nuking Russia would be so terrible, but our nukes for damn sure still work. We need to stay the fuck out of this directly it's not our fight - if Russia starts going unhinged it would be better to get the Russian people or military to revolt than it would be to eradicate the Russian forces. I think Putin and some cronies going away and Russia is a great contributing member to the global economy. 

He’s not suggesting we nuke Russia. Read better.

[Herbie Hancock 7347]

The fact that you think Russia still has nukes worth a shit after this shit show disaster makes me kind of laugh. There's 0 chance I would believe that Russia has the capability of a successful nuclear strike and that their defense systems are anywhere good enough to intercept the rebuttal of launching and failing.

Donnie, you’re out of your element. Way out of your element.

[Herbie Hancock 7347]

 
He's ex KGB, he knows how it plays it out. If nukes enter a conflict between russia and the US he knows that is the end of humanity. There is no surviving, hes not some crazed religious zealot eager to meet his maker.

This is exactly why he would. When he feels cornered and sees no way out, he’ll hit the self destruct button. He’s too arrogant and psychotic to do anything other than go down in flames.

[WillUSAF 226]

NO and FUCK NO!!

As someone that has been deployed way too many times (Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan-just to name a few) there is no reason for us to be there. Period..

We have many more options that we can provide the Ukrainians and our allies. Our boys and girls need to stay home. War destroys lives (the people fighting, their families and all of the civilians in the conflict zone) There is only 1 thing that benefits from war and 1 thing only-the military industrial complex. 

[LCHorn 2620]

19 hours ago, RPM said:

Not seeing the correct answer which is Charlie Wilson's War II: Ukrainian Boogaloo

I think the geopolitical challenge of the 21st century is how to trick your rival into entering a quagmire.  Obama successfully navigated out of it in Syria but Ukraine looks delicious.  Enormous country from an occupation standpoint with lots of friendly access points to supply an insurgency.  
 

If I’m CIA I’m licking my teeth because you’re about to have real targets to surveil and disrupt and a friendly populace rather than jihadis that are constantly on the move in a country where no one wants you there.  

[formermav43 4606]

6 hours ago, immamac said:

The fact that you think Russia still has nukes worth a shit after this shit show disaster makes me kind of laugh. There's 0 chance I would believe that Russia has the capability of a successful nuclear strike and that their defense systems are anywhere good enough to intercept the rebuttal of launching and failing.

Based on your past analysis of this situation, we need to all start building bunkers ASAP.

[Neonmoon 38129]

21 hours ago, RPM said:

Not seeing the correct answer which is Charlie Wilson's War II: Ukrainian Boogaloo

It was option #3 

which I chose, but yes, your title is better 

[Smax 3800]

3 hours ago, Herbie Hancock said:

This is exactly why he would. When he feels cornered and sees no way out, he’ll hit the self destruct button. He’s too arrogant and psychotic to do anything other than go down in flames.

 

 

Couldn't disagree more

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

3 hours ago, Herbie Hancock said:

This is exactly why he would. When he feels cornered and sees no way out, he’ll hit the self destruct button. He’s too arrogant and psychotic to do anything other than go down in flames.

He’s sitting on hundreds of billions of dollars and nukes. He has a lot of leverage to negotiate his departure from power to somewhere that will take his money…if he isn’t murdered by one of his own.

[Pescado_Rojo 19416]

I wonder how much defensive weaponry we could stick in-country and operate remotely from other countries. Things like Patriot batteries, etc. put the hardware in Kyiv and have a Ukrainian private sitting in the “driver seat” in Poland with a US operator looking over his shoulder telling him what button to push.