Ukraine - somebody explain to me

[Jeff Lebowski]

Geez. What a speech to congress by Zelenski.

[LVAllen]

Geez. What a speech to congress by Zelenski.

Yeah, but did you see what he was wearing?

Embedded Tweet

[YOhio]

Yeah, but did you see what he was wearing?

Embedded Tweet

I disagree with Peter Schiff on the importance of Zelensky's clothes.

[Commando]

Oh that poor bastard Zelensky- I'm sure his suit was tied up at the cleaners while he's fending off elite assassination teams and leading his country against an invasion from the fucking Russian army.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Yeah, but did you see what he was wearing?

Embedded Tweet

Ha. What an ass.

[SeattleUte]

I disagree. I think it is all on us, not the Ukrainians. If it were up to their resolve a victory would be inevitable. They have held off the Russians for weeks when the entire world thought it would he over in a couple days. But to expect them to suffer and die indefinitely without firm continuous signals that the west has their back is not reasonable. When we say shipping javelins and stingers into Ukraine is not an escalation but allowing someone to use our base to transfer planes into Ukraine is an escalation that is playing Putin's game. When you have European players like Macron openly calling for an end to hostilities without tying it to Zelensky's publicly stated terms, that's a problem.

I like the sanctions and the aid on the ground. We need more of it. Mbn talked about a gradual ratcheting up of pressure on Russia to back Putin down. While I don't think we can move to a no fly zone, I think the concept is correct. It's the only thing that can make up for a couple decades of failure in containment and deterrence. But I fear the opposite is happening. Putin is backing us off slowly. Eventually the Ukrainians may accept terms that hand Putin a win if they lose confidence that we will keep our word. The United States in particular doesn't have the best track record on that since the fall of Saigon.

I do agree the stakes could not be higher. If Putin gets a de facto win, his next move will eventually be to break NATO through an incident with a border member (perhaps a "mistake" in targeting) with the gamble that the west will not respond. And that is not out of the realm of possibilities. Again I sincerely hope I am wrong. Maybe in this modern interconnected world the sanctions and financial warfare will break him before our resolve weakens. But to your point in your last few posts, Russian leaders don't view 10,000 or 50,000 more dead soldiers than expected or massive civilian casualties as issues in and of themselves, as long as the goal is still in reach.

It seems we're working from the same playbook but you have done your own research regarding mode of execution. The cardinal rule of containment is avoidance of direct engagement with Russia or China. This never happened in the Cold war and we won with no nukes.

You claim the West is backing down, but the one example you use is that it would not allow Polish warplanes to be flown from a US based into Ukraine airspace. This was a judgment call and I don't have the competency to disagree with it. Do you? Is war your field? Do you know that Russia would not have regarded it as direct engagement by the US and escalated?

Moreover, the decision about the warplanes seems to have been a consensus among European leaders. Biden has not taken the chauvinistic or heavy handed approach to American involvement in European affairs that characterized the Cold War. It may have been essential for a long time but wore thin. The WSJ editorial page disagrees, but my sense is it's been working.

Any other examples that the West is backing down? I wish Germany had not allowed itself to be reliant on Russian and I wonder if it wouldn't take an intolerable sacrifice just to get it from Norway or wherever, but again, not my field. Germany did cancel the Nord Stream 2 and I've read it's working on reducing natural gas from Russia in a stepped manner.

Your pessimism can't be squared with liberalism's response to totalitarianism since its advent. Yes, it is always slow getting off the blocks. We have an arrogant feeling of inevitability and we want to make money most of all, but once off the blocks the West has always responded with increasing force--even if the means is containment--and not backed off. So far, liberalism has only triumphed.

[SeattleUte]

The thing about no fly zone, Polish warplanes flown from US bases, and generally direct engagement with Russia, Europe has more skin in the game than we do. This is the best reason to coordinate with Europe. Russia may not be able to launch ICBMs, probably not without a lot of preparation and some time, anyway. The realistic nuke scenario is tactical nuclear weapons in Europe. Our restraint may be saving Ukraine from itself.

[SeattleUte]

What has taken me totally by surprise is the collective decision by whole nations that totalitarianism is best for them. This decision is reached in a clear-eyed way recognizing the Western alternative and calling what they have opted for totalitarianism. Alexander Dugin has written explicitly that Russians don't want individualism, personal accountability, meritocracy, diversity, variety, and changing norms. They want strong leadership, stasis, a measure of economic security. And not just Russia. Also, China, Hungary, and others.

I suffered from the delusion of liberalism's inevitability as much as anyone.

And I should have known better, given my upbringing and continuing experience with that past.

[The_Tick]

It seems we're working from the same playbook but you have done your own research regarding mode of execution. The cardinal rule of containment is avoidance of direct engagement with Russia or China. This never happened in the Cold war and we won with no nukes.

You claim the West is backing down, but the one example you use is that it would not allow Polish warplanes to be flown from a US based into Ukraine airspace. This was a judgment call and I don't have the competency to disagree with it. Do you? Is war your field? Do you know that Russia would not have regarded it as direct engagement by the US and escalated?

Moreover, the decision about the warplanes seems to have been a consensus among European leaders. Biden has not taken the chauvinistic or heavy handed approach to American involvement in European affairs that characterized the Cold War. It may have been essential for a long time but wore thin. The WSJ editorial page disagrees, but my sense is it's been working.

Any other examples that the West is backing down? I wish Germany had not allowed itself to be reliant on Russian and I wonder if it wouldn't take an intolerable sacrifice just to get it from Norway or wherever, but again, not my field. Germany did cancel the Nord Stream 2 and I've read it's working on reducing natural gas from Russia in a stepped manner.

Your pessimism can't be squared with liberalism's response to totalitarianism since its advent. Yes, it is always slow getting off the blocks. We have an arrogant feeling of inevitability and we want to make money most of all, but once off the blocks the West has always responded with increasing force--even if the means is containment--and not backed off. So far, liberalism has only triumphed.

Let's be fair here....something not being in "your field" has never kept you from having a really high opinion of your opinion.

[Jeff Lebowski]

What has taken me totally by surprise is the collective decision by whole nations that totalitarianism is best for them. This decision is reached in a clear-eyed way recognizing the Western alternative and calling what they have opted for totalitarianism. Alexander Dugin has written explicitly that Russians don't want individualism, personal accountability, meritocracy, diversity, variety, and changing norms. They want strong leadership, stasis, a measure of economic security. And not just Russia. Also, China, Hungary, and others.

I suffered from the delusion of liberalism's inevitability as much as anyone.

And I should have known better, given my upbringing and continuing experience with that past.

Well said.

I am listening to the latest Ezra Klein podcast. Incredibly enlightening discussion on the politics of inevitability and how and why it is wrong.

[SeattleUte]

Let's be fair here....something not being in "your field" has never kept you from having a really high opinion of your opinion.

What do you mean, I constantly say it's not my field and am careful to stay within it.

[The_Tick]

What do you mean, I constantly say it's not my field and am careful to stay within it.

I could spend a good part of the afternoon digging up posts from the Covid thread that could/might disagree with this. You spent a good portion of last year as a virologist.

[SeattleUte]

I could spend a good part of the afternoon digging up posts from the Covid thread that could/might disagree with this. You spent a good portion of last year as a virologist.

Not true. If you follow the course of my posts, I changed my positions in response to new data and expert input. but even early on I was citing scientists with strong credentials (who turned out to be wrong). I even ultimately lionized Noah for his correct initial concerns and apologized to him for some rough treatment in my posts.

Covid is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. People who think they know better than the mainstream.

Smart people change their minds. It's a sign of character and intelligence, not weakness. Also, the mainstream is almost always right. Lessons from Covid.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Not true. If you follow the course of my posts, I changed my positions in response to new data and expert input. but even early on I was citing scientists with strong credentials (who turned out to be wrong). I even ultimately lionized Noah for his correct initial concerns and apologized to him for some rough treatment in my posts.

Covid is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. People who think they know better than the mainstream.

Smart people change their minds. It's a sign of character and intelligence, not weakness. Also, the mainstream is almost always right. Lessons from Covid.

You went after me with personal attacks more than anyone during the pandemic. That was weird.

But you have sincerely apologized and we are square. I really respect that.

[The_Tick]

Not true. If you follow the course of my posts, I changed my positions in response to new data and expert input. but even early on I was citing scientists with strong credentials (who turned out to be wrong). I even ultimately lionized Noah for his correct initial concerns and apologized to him for some rough treatment in my posts.

Covid is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. People who think they know better than the mainstream.

Smart people change their minds. It's a sign of character and intelligence, not weakness. Also, the mainstream is almost always right. Lessons from Covid.

I'm just saying that asking someone if "that is their area of expertise" shuts down conversation. Because it basically is telling someone to sit down and let the adults talk about it.

I am an expert in oil and gas measurement. When people are wrong about stuff I just ignore it and let them have discussions. I'm working on becoming an expert on Psychoeducational reports and the IEP process. I'd never shut someone down though if they were misguided or misinformed, I'd engage and have a convo.

You are good people, your tone has somewhat softened over the last year.