Ukraine - somebody explain to me

[BlueK]

What do you think would be different?

It may have been over by now. Russia was losing at the time and Ukraine was starting to really go on the offensive and put into place what they needed to push them the rest of the way out. Then the support was pulled out from under them because, well, Trump actually favors the other side for whatever reason.

[frank ryan]

I should have more directly apologized for my spastic comment, I am sorry

My intent here was to pivot to what you think should be done to Russia re: Ukraine, and what should be done to prevent future invasions. I have been open about my opinion that there is no doplomatic solution without letting Russia keep some of Ukraine, to which you routinely suggest that is dangerous and opens the path to Russia invading more countries.

You and I have been stalled out on that difference for a while, so i (spastically and recklessly) threw out the comment i did, as a sort of 'extreme' opposite opinion.


No one is proposing realistic solutions to peace with Russia, simply repeatedly pointing out how bad they are, and how it is a shame we've 'abandoned' the Ukraine.

Any treaty will come with concessions. What concessions are you willing to take? Is a treaty off the table because Russia is too unreasonable? If that is the case, what are the next steps? Should the USA pour money into Ukraine or should the rest of NATO keep stepping up as lead in both strategy and funding. (This is one area i personally very much agree with Trump, how can the EU NATO members sit back and expect the US to carry the load here?)

so, what does Russia get to keep? How do they get out of this? Russia is not gonna just gonna pull out like we did in Vietnam or the GWOT due to political fatigue and administration change, they are an autocracy, and need to be able to save some face, IMO.

So there are few points I want to respond to.

Trump pressuring NATO countries to raise their defense budget was something worth doing, but his methods weren't good and his understanding of a complex and successful military alliance was limited to "They need to pay more." Not everything he says is a consequence-less funny meme or joke.

He didn't acknowledge how many allies were already meeting the threshold. He has also floated the idea of leaving NATO (something I've publicly worried about for a while. His threats toward Denmark/Greenland shouldn't be laughed away. It's already had real effects. He is far far more comfortable Sabre rattling with allies than offering a muted criticism of Putin. Canada is doing everything it can to be back away from the US. All of that alone makes our country much less safe.

The US isn't part of NATO because we are being nice but because it serves our interests.

If you watched the Zelenskyy visit to the White House you should've seen how embarrassing JD Vance was when he tried humiliated Ukraine's leader. Contrast with their treatment of Putin and it's stunning. Tough guy Trump said nothing when reports of Russia paying the Taliban a bounty for dead Americans in Afghanistan.

It's very frustrating to mention concerns with Russia and then get met with howls of "Russiagate hoax." That is an uninformed retort that signals a lack of awareness. 34 people were charged as a result of that investigation include six Trump associates. Robert Mueller doesn't think it was hoax. He reported that Trump obstructed justice.

You'd have to suspend common-sense to believe Trump hasn't been wildly sympathetic to Putin.

Among them the people charged and convicted was Paul Manafort, Trump's first campaign manager. Manafort previously worked overseas in place like Ukraine where he back a Russian puppet. One of the policy changes pushed for in 2016 at the Republican platform planks involving being supportive of Ukraine. He pardon several of his co-conspirators like Manafort, Michael Flynn and Roger Stone.


Europe has been stepping up with regards to helping Ukraine. A lot of the "funding" given by the United States to Kiev came in the form of ammunition and material that was going to be expired. There's hundred of millions of dollars in Russian assets frozen in Europe. The EU wants to give these fund to Ukraine, but we haven't okayed it.

We are a trusted partner of Westen Europe anymore.

There have been reports of Ukrainian information being passed on to Russia.

Ukraine had serious momentum when before Trump took power. Part of Trump's campaign involved MAGA insisting that because Russia didn't I'll invade during his first administration they wouldn't do so if Trump was in power instead of Biden.

This is not like Vietnam, you're right. Russia has lost by some estimates over a million men. We lost 50,000 soldiers in Vietnam.

Putin does not care about life. He is trying to alter the world order, not go after Ukraine to take care of Nazis, he has asserted. The general foreign policy playbook of Moscow is out in the open. "The Foundations of Geopolitics," discusses how Russia needs to attack the transatlantic alliance. It also shares the importance of Russia recaptured old territories that became independent after the USSR collapsed (btw Putin has installing moments to Lenin and Stalin). Ukraine, Moldova and the Baltics are explicitly mentioned.


Russia losing their young men at a glaring rate but it wouldn't take a massive amount of battle hardened troops to run right over a Baltic state. Some of these countries don't even have jets. Any NATO reaction wouldn't happen in time to stop it.

As to realistic solutions with ending the war in Ukraine. It's been Russia who has sabotaged peace talks. They have repeatedly violated case fire agreements to attack innocent civilians. Ukraine gets to have a say over how much territory they are willing to cede war-criminal led Russia.

In a nutshell it hasn't been anywhere as taxing and problematic to support Ukraine and we've received benefits.

Real time info the war and knowledge about drone warfare is no longer passed on by the Ukrainians because agreements the Trump administration opted out of.

We stopped a lot of aid, but that doesn't give us the right to tell another country to submit when they want to keep fighting. Scores of European, NATO and former US officials have cautioned against allowing Russia to stream-roll their neighbor as that would embolden Moscow to more of this.

W and Obama are accountable for some of the conditions that allowed Putin to take this risk. Mitt Romney was right about Russia.

[wally]

So there are few points I want to respond to.

Trump pressuring NATO countries to raise their defense budget was something worth doing, but his methods weren't good and his understanding of a complex and successful military alliance was limited to "They need to pay more." Not everything he says is a consequence-less funny meme or joke.

He didn't acknowledge how many allies were already meeting the threshold. He has also floated the idea of leaving NATO (something I've publicly worried about for a while. His threats toward Denmark/Greenland shouldn't be laughed away. It's already had real effects. He is far far more comfortable Sabre rattling with allies than offering a muted criticism of Putin. Canada is doing everything it can to be back away from the US. All of that alone makes our country much less safe.

The US isn't part of NATO because we are being nice but because it serves our interests.

If you watched the Zelenskyy visit to the White House you should've seen how embarrassing JD Vance was when he tried humiliated Ukraine's leader. Contrast with their treatment of Putin and it's stunning. Tough guy Trump said nothing when reports of Russia paying the Taliban a bounty for dead Americans in Afghanistan.

It's very frustrating to mention concerns with Russia and then get met with howls of "Russiagate hoax." That is an uninformed retort that signals a lack of awareness. 34 people were charged as a result of that investigation include six Trump associates. Robert Mueller doesn't think it was hoax. He reported that Trump obstructed justice.

You'd have to suspend common-sense to believe Trump hasn't been wildly sympathetic to Putin.

Among them the people charged and convicted was Paul Manafort, Trump's first campaign manager. Manafort previously worked overseas in place like Ukraine where he back a Russian puppet. One of the policy changes pushed for in 2016 at the Republican platform planks involving being supportive of Ukraine. He pardon several of his co-conspirators like Manafort, Michael Flynn and Roger Stone.


Europe has been stepping up with regards to helping Ukraine. A lot of the "funding" given by the United States to Kiev came in the form of ammunition and material that was going to be expired. There's hundred of millions of dollars in Russian assets frozen in Europe. The EU wants to give these fund to Ukraine, but we haven't okayed it.

We are a trusted partner of Westen Europe anymore.

There have been reports of Ukrainian information being passed on to Russia.

Ukraine had serious momentum when before Trump took power. Part of Trump's campaign involved MAGA insisting that because Russia didn't I'll invade during his first administration they wouldn't do so if Trump was in power instead of Biden.

This is not like Vietnam, you're right. Russia has lost by some estimates over a million men. We lost 50,000 soldiers in Vietnam.

Putin does not care about life. He is trying to alter the world order, not go after Ukraine to take care of Nazis, he has asserted. The general foreign policy playbook of Moscow is out in the open. "The Foundations of Geopolitics," discusses how Russia needs to attack the transatlantic alliance. It also shares the importance of Russia recaptured old territories that became independent after the USSR collapsed (btw Putin has installing moments to Lenin and Stalin). Ukraine, Moldova and the Baltics are explicitly mentioned.


Russia losing their young men at a glaring rate but it wouldn't take a massive amount of battle hardened troops to run right over a Baltic state. Some of these countries don't even have jets. Any NATO reaction wouldn't happen in time to stop it.

As to realistic solutions with ending the war in Ukraine. It's been Russia who has sabotaged peace talks. They have repeatedly violated case fire agreements to attack innocent civilians. Ukraine gets to have a say over how much territory they are willing to cede war-criminal led Russia.

In a nutshell it hasn't been anywhere as taxing and problematic to support Ukraine and we've received benefits.

Real time info the war and knowledge about drone warfare is no longer passed on by the Ukrainians because agreements the Trump administration opted out of.

We stopped a lot of aid, but that doesn't give us the right to tell another country to submit when they want to keep fighting. Scores of European, NATO and former US officials have cautioned against allowing Russia to stream-roll their neighbor as that would embolden Moscow to more of this.

W and Obama are accountable for some of the conditions that allowed Putin to take this risk. Mitt Romney was right about Russia.

I don't disagree with a single thing you have said above relative to the Ukraine-Russia conflict. And I will not defend Trump on any of his tactics, I am on record here stating that I never voted/won't vote for him, but I find it hard to have conversations around these topics when they often spin off into simply just criticizing Trump. Additionally, whenever Trump actually goes in a direction that I think is beneficial he does it in ways that are so very, well, Trumpian as you so well articulate with regard to the need for increased EU NATO defense spending. We probably agree that Trump's tactics are dumb.

What I am having trouble squaring with is primarily this: How do we manage conflict with other Nuclear powerhouses like Russia? Russa has more Nukes than the rest of the world combined, excluding the US. the US has more nukes than the rest of the world combined excluding Russia. In my opinion this cannot be ignored when navigating the Ukraine-Russia conflict. I think we have been lulled into a passivity regarding nuclear weapons simply because they are fading from our collective memories. Less than 1% of the global population was alive when Fat Boy was dropped on Nagasaki, and the Cuban Missile crisis is now a thing that only grandparents remember. Only Gen Xers remember growing up during the cold war and as one I am ashamed to say that when the Iron curtain fell, I thought that nuclear risks had too.

Again, I will invoke John Mearsheimer: international relations exist in basically anarchy. There are no broadly accepted rules for nations to engage with between each other. The UN is a nice idea, but we all know that if a superpower is censured they will just 'go it alone' for as long as it takes after they secure their interest until they work back into UN fellowship and memories fade. Iran was supposed to abide by the nuclear nonproliferation treaty terms set for them by the international committee they smiled and nodded all the while basically secretly saying, "yeah, fuck that shit."

Diplomacy or sanctions have to be extreme to take significant effect on deterring poor behavior, but the ultimate deterrent is armed conflict, and armed conflict at scale has never happened between nuclear powerhouses. We are getting closer and closer now to that by waging conflict through surrogates. the GWOT was low stakes because our enemy was not a nation backed by Russia or China. For the EU and USA to go all-in backing Ukraine is tenuous ground. Russia recklessly started this mess, and so the tendency is to want them to suffer somehow for it, but they are effectively wearing a nuclear suicide vest while working toward their ends here, and that cannot be ignored.

Again, my position, regardless of how stupid Trump is or anything else, is we are in unchartered waters with regard to the Ukraine-Russia conflict. NATO has never been so sorely tested in its existence. Whether we like it or not, nuclear powerhouses have more liberties than those who are not, and any path to peace has to allow Russia to save face in some capacity, and we have to have a Russia that is strong enough to continue to secure its considerable nuclear assets until and unless Russia dismantles them.

[Goatnapper'96]

I think if it weren't for Trump winning the election that the situation today would be different. Even with the US completely withdrawing support for Ukraine, Russia has still been struggling with keeping what they have.

Someday many of you will stop your unhealthy obsession that anything that isn't good must be somehow tied to Donald Trump. It genuinely clouds the enormous capacity so many of you genuinely possess. For example this....the war in Ukraine, at least the moving of front lines and the taking of territory, was a quagmire by January, 2025. If America made a mistake in failing to support Ukraine to the point that the opportunity to dislodge the gawdless commies from occupied Ukraine, not sure if you are including Crimea and the area in the Donbass that Russia had de-facto control of for a 7-8 years before its army invaded the rest of Ukraine, then the blame resides with Joe Biden. If you are including the lands taken in 2014 and 2015 then the blame lies with Obama as well.

Further, I am not convinced that even if Biden had been enormously liberal with the US checkbook and military equipment I am skeptical that Ukraine had the manpower to blast through the Surovikin Line to get the fight into a mobile war where the western donated equipment would have put them at a tactical advantage. When they tried they were not successful.

I also think that Trump's approach to NATO/European allies has worked well for Ukraine. They have ramped up their Military-Industrial complex and Ukraine has essentially held its own with Russia utilizing superior drone technology that exposes Russia's poor capacity to defend its logistical component. I don't think Ukraine has the will or manpower to try to take back the Crimean Peninsula and parts of Donbass the gawdless commies occupy, offensive operations always require more resources than defensive, but they have done amazing given what their resources were in 2022.

I don't really care what history will determine who was to blame but my opinion is that Putin's foray will hamper Russian Imperialstic tendencies for at least a generation and they who deserve the most credit for that will be Ukraine and its European allies who developed a superior drone regime that has kept Russia at bay for a couple of years and is now starting to cause Russia serious tactical problems and mitigating Russian capacity to take the fight to Ukraine other than a tit-for-tat drone and missile bombing campaign. Front lines are not moving significantly.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Someday many of you will stop your unhealthy obsession that anything that isn't good must be somehow tied to Donald Trump. It genuinely clouds the enormous capacity so many of you genuinely possess. For example this....the war in Ukraine, at least the moving of front lines and the taking of territory, was a quagmire by January, 2025. If America made a mistake in failing to support Ukraine to the point that the opportunity to dislodge the gawdless commies from occupied Ukraine, not sure if you are including Crimea and the area in the Donbass that Russia had de-facto control of for a 7-8 years before its army invaded the rest of Ukraine, then the blame resides with Joe Biden. If you are including the lands taken in 2014 and 2015 then the blame lies with Obama as well.

Further, I am not convinced that even if Biden had been enormously liberal with the US checkbook and military equipment I am skeptical that Ukraine had the manpower to blast through the Surovikin Line to get the fight into a mobile war where the western donated equipment would have put them at a tactical advantage. When they tried they were not successful.

I also think that Trump's approach to NATO/European allies has worked well for Ukraine. They have ramped up their Military-Industrial complex and Ukraine has essentially held its own with Russia utilizing superior drone technology that exposes Russia's poor capacity to defend its logistical component. I don't think Ukraine has the will or manpower to try to take back the Crimean Peninsula and parts of Donbass the gawdless commies occupy, offensive operations always require more resources than defensive, but they have done amazing given what their resources were in 2022.

I don't really care what history will determine who was to blame but my opinion is that Putin's foray will hamper Russian Imperialstic tendencies for at least a generation and they who deserve the most credit for that will be Ukraine and its European allies who developed a superior drone regime that has kept Russia at bay for a couple of years and is now starting to cause Russia serious tactical problems and mitigating Russian capacity to take the fight to Ukraine other than a tit-for-tat drone and missile bombing campaign. Front lines are not moving significantly.

Tremendous respect for Ukraine. They have battled Goliath and held their own. And have developed a world-class defense industry.

Crimea is interesting in that there is one main land highway and then the Crimean Bridge. Ukraine is doing serious damage to transport on the highway. If only they could ramp that up and then somehow destroy the bridge, things could get very interesting.

[frank ryan]

There isn't any way of painting Trump's actions with Ukraine or NATO as wise and effective and I resent the assertion that my opinions are based on "being obsessed" with Trump. They are based on information I've consumed and events I'm following.

He has shed American soft power like none other and his constant threatening of NATO is destabilizing to the alliance.

[eldiente]

Tremendous respect for Ukraine. They have battled Goliath and held their own. And have developed a world-class defense industry.

Crimea is interesting in that there is one main land highway and then the Crimean Bridge. Ukraine is doing serious damage to transport on the highway. If only they could ramp that up and then somehow destroy the bridge, things could get very interesting.

Leave the bridge standing and make the shortages so severe that Russians flee via the only means left. Destroying the bridge possibility makes them more resistant to withdrawal.

[Goatnapper'96]

Leave the bridge standing and make the shortages so severe that Russians flee via the only means left. Destroying the bridge possibility makes them more resistant to withdrawal.

There is an enormous difference in the cost of human lives and resources when one goes on the offensive in an effort to retake territory- especially territory that Russia has occupied for more than a decade and has invested enormously into building very difficult to penetrate defensive fortifications. I was hopeful that when the US and NATO provided Ukraine with modern armor, both tanks and Infantry Fighting vehicles, they could break through the defensive fortifications and turn the fight into a mobile war but they were either unable or unwilling to pay the human price necessary to do that. I have read that had Ukraine had modern jets to establish air superiority they might have been able to do it but the air assets had not yet been provided. I don't know where Ukraine is vis-a-vis the gawdless commies wrt Air warfare, but the fact that they have yet to really try a mobile counter attack since the much ballyhooed original one that did not deliver tangible victories, evaluated by territory retaken, causes me to believe they don't believe they yet have the manpower necessary to break through and put the gawdless commies on the run.

But they are really attriting the gawdless commies in the rear echelons right now. If the gawdless commies are unable to adjust to the improving Ukrainian drone warfare the day will come that their logistical rear will be so vulnerable that Ukraine might try to break through again.

[Bo Diddley]

Yeah, I have a hard time seeing much territory changing hands barring a really significant change in the calculus of this war.

Really interesting to see Ukraine's reach into Russia increasing. That could motivate Russia to come to the table.

[frank ryan]

Yeah, I have a hard time seeing much territory changing hands barring a really significant change in the calculus of this war.

Really interesting to see Ukraine's reach into Russia increasing. That could motivate Russia to come to the table.

One of Biden's failure was not providing Ukraine with arms in a more timely manner. That could've made a big difference

[Goatnapper'96]

One of Biden's failure was not providing Ukraine with arms in a more timely manner. That could've made a big difference

I think this has been handled about as well as it could be. Russian aggression has not been fully deterred but they have only taken limited more land than they already controlled since 2015. The majority of the support has come from Europe and the lives lost have been limited to almost entirely Russians and Ukrainians and a smattering of foreign mercenaries. The warfare has been controlled and not spilled over borders to any serious extent. Europe pulled this off dealing with that Hungarian President who wasn't much help.

In hindsight we can say that if Ukraine had an effective mobile Army in 2022 they would have likely stopped Russia at the border and perhaps taken back Russian occupied Donbass and the Crimean peninsula but that glosses over a lot of history that most of us didn't fully grasp. The support Ukraine has gotten has stiffened them up to the point where things are fairly close to where they were in 2022. It would be nice to see Russia fully defeated, driven back into Russia and Ukraine getting legal control over what its borders were and what it controlled in 2014 but I think the situation has played out about as good as it could have.

[Jeff Lebowski]

There is an enormous difference in the cost of human lives and resources when one goes on the offensive in an effort to retake territory- especially territory that Russia has occupied for more than a decade and has invested enormously into building very difficult to penetrate defensive fortifications. I was hopeful that when the US and NATO provided Ukraine with modern armor, both tanks and Infantry Fighting vehicles, they could break through the defensive fortifications and turn the fight into a mobile war but they were either unable or unwilling to pay the human price necessary to do that. I have read that had Ukraine had modern jets to establish air superiority they might have been able to do it but the air assets had not yet been provided. I don't know where Ukraine is vis-a-vis the gawdless commies wrt Air warfare, but the fact that they have yet to really try a mobile counter attack since the much ballyhooed original one that did not deliver tangible victories, evaluated by territory retaken, causes me to believe they don't believe they yet have the manpower necessary to break through and put the gawdless commies on the run.

But they are really attriting the gawdless commies in the rear echelons right now. If the gawdless commies are unable to adjust to the improving Ukrainian drone warfare the day will come that their logistical rear will be so vulnerable that Ukraine might try to break through again.

Does this traditional calculus hold in the era of drone warfare?

Any possibility they isolate Crimea logistically to the point they abandon it? There are more ways to conquer land than frontal assaults, no?

[Goatnapper'96]

Does this traditional calculus hold in the era of drone warfare?

Any possibility they isolate Crimea logistically to the point they abandon it? There are more ways to conquer land than frontal assaults, no?

Russia did just that with on the Western side of the Dnipro River and then blew up the damn to flood the area at the tail end of the Ukrainian counteroffensive in late '22 so I guess there is precedence. I do think the Russian mythology of Crimea always belonging to Russia will give Russia more resolve than they showed with the territory west of Dnipro River they abdicated.. I also think Russia can and will adapt to the Ukrainian drone advantages. Gauging how Europe reacted to when Russia occupied the Crimean peninsula the first time leads me to believe liberating Crimea is a higher priority to Ukraine than it is their European allies-I think that will play a role. Europe believed it had an interest to stall the Russian advance but it may be comfortable with where the front lines are. Not sure they want to pay the price it might cost to root out the gawdless commies of the Ukrainian territory they are occupying.

In the end I believe there is a limit to how much success you can find in destroying the opposing enemy's rear echelon-warfare since caveman A hit caveman B with a club is about holding real estate. That generally requires commitments in manpower and equipment actually on the Mother Earth you want. Certainly, attriting your enemy's capacity to fight has become a real big deal since the US Civil War but the actual taking of the real estate requires a really big commitment and will cost enormous resources in manpower and equipment when the fight is between two similarly situated opponents.

I don't like Russia and I am not particularly objective about them. I never trusted them in the least after the Cold War ended and we were frenemies and I am not surprised about what is going on. I do think they are spending enormous resources on an imperialistic foray and that will force them to regroup after this, but I would love it if Ukraine were able to counterattack and retake some of their territory back. If they were able to take back the land north of the peninsula they could possibly then isolate it enough that Russia has no choice but to surrender the land. But I don't think Ukraine has the juice to do it.

[Bo Diddley]

Russia did just that with on the Western side of the Dnipro River and then blew up the damn to flood the area at the tail end of the Ukrainian counteroffensive in late '22 so I guess there is precedence. I do think the Russian mythology of Crimea always belonging to Russia will give Russia more resolve than they showed with the territory west of Dnipro River they abdicated.. I also think Russia can and will adapt to the Ukrainian drone advantages. Gauging how Europe reacted to when Russia occupied the Crimean peninsula the first time leads me to believe liberating Crimea is a higher priority to Ukraine than it is their European allies-I think that will play a role. Europe believed it had an interest to stall the Russian advance but it may be comfortable with where the front lines are. Not sure they want to pay the price it might cost to root out the gawdless commies of the Ukrainian territory they are occupying.

In the end I believe there is a limit to how much success you can find in destroying the opposing enemy's rear echelon-warfare since caveman A hit caveman B with a club is about holding real estate. That generally requires commitments in manpower and equipment actually on the Mother Earth you want. Certainly, attriting your enemy's capacity to fight has become a real big deal since the US Civil War but the actual taking of the real estate requires a really big commitment and will cost enormous resources in manpower and equipment when the fight is between two similarly situated opponents.

I don't like Russia and I am not particularly objective about them. I never trusted them in the least after the Cold War ended and we were frenemies and I am not surprised about what is going on. I do think they are spending enormous resources on an imperialistic foray and that will force them to regroup after this, but I would love it if Ukraine were able to counterattack and retake some of their territory back. If they were able to take back the land north of the peninsula they could possibly then isolate it enough that Russia has no choice but to surrender the land. But I don't think Ukraine has the juice to do it.

Such is the nature of modern warfare (I suppose that's always been a factor as old as time, but it has accelerated.) TTP's from both sides evolve over time. This was interesting to watch in Iraq.

We're learning a ton from Ukraine right now, but certainly some of those lessons have a shelf life.

[Jeff Lebowski]

A day or two ago, Ukraine had a successful drone attack on a refinery in St. Petersburg, far north of Moscow.

I am sure this is a coincidence:

Embedded Tweet