Ukraine - somebody explain to me

[frank ryan]

In the other thread I minimized the prospects of Russia attacking one of the smaller less-significant European countries. But this article in the WSJ doesn’t think it’s that far-fetched:

https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/rus...8d94?st=wGss53

It's far from a ridiculous concern.

[wally]

It's far from a ridiculous concern.

Great point, let's start dropping bombs on Russia preemptively and mobilize 100,000 troops into Ukraine and "win the war!"

[BlueK]

Great point, let's start dropping bombs on Russia preemptively and mobilize 100,000 troops into Ukraine and "win the war!"

Weird response.

[chrisrenrut]

Great point, let's start dropping bombs on Russia preemptively and mobilize 100,000 troops into Ukraine and "win the war!"

Oh, I see we have moved on to the solutioning phase now. You may have overshot the mark a bit with this one.

[wally]

Oh, I see we have moved on to the solutioning phase now. You may have overshot the mark a bit with this one.

LoL! I kinda spazzed out there for a minute, huh?

[Moliere]

In the other thread I minimized the prospects of Russia attacking one of the smaller less-significant European countries. But this article in the WSJ doesn’t think it’s that far-fetched:

https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/rus...8d94?st=wGss53

I mean, the baltics aren’t exactly large countries. But I still don’t think Putin stands any chance in invading Estonia. The article makes it sound like Putin has to find more bodies for the Ukraine front, but he can’t just force a draft for Ukraine as that would indicate he’s losing there, so the okay would be to force a draft and invade Estonia as cover. Putin is irrational so it’s possible to happen, but it would be as stupid as most of the dumb decisions Hitler made in 1944/45 when the war was all but won.

Just becasue the US has an idiot president that doesn’t like NATO doesn’t mean Germany, France, England and other countries that are much larger economically and technologically than Russia will just throw their hands up and say there’s nothing they can do. This script has been done before (WWII) and everyone knows you need to stop it before it starts. If Lutin invaded a NATO country, regardless of what the US and a turkey do, the rest of Europe will respond and fight to expel Russia.

[frank ryan]

I mean, the baltics aren’t exactly large countries. But I still don’t think Putin stands any chance in invading Estonia. The article makes it sound like Putin has to find more bodies for the Ukraine front, but he can’t just force a draft for Ukraine as that would indicate he’s losing there, so the okay would be to force a draft and invade Estonia as cover. Putin is irrational so it’s possible to happen, but it would be as stupid as most of the dumb decisions Hitler made in 1944/45 when the war was all but won.

Just becasue the US has an idiot president that doesn’t like NATO doesn’t mean Germany, France, England and other countries that are much larger economically and technologically than Russia will just throw their hands up and say there’s nothing they can do. This script has been done before (WWII) and everyone knows you need to stop it before it starts. If Lutin invaded a NATO country, regardless of what the US and a turkey do, the rest of Europe will respond and fight to expel Russia.

Estonia could be taken in a flash. They don't even posses fighter or bomber jets. They have less than 50,000 soldiers under arms.
I think France, the UK and Germany would respond, not to mention a determined Poland, but they lack abilities only the US has. It would be much more difficult, and the US voting NO on article 5 of NATO makes it that much to push other states into taking action. And it should be obvious to everyone by now that Trump is deferential to Putin, and is incapable of standing up to Russia.

[frank ryan]

Great point, let's start dropping bombs on Russia preemptively and mobilize 100,000 troops into Ukraine and "win the war!"

what the fuck are you on about?

[wally]

what the fuck are you on about?

I spazzed out a little. But since you want to chat about it: how far are you willing to go to restore Ukraine to its original borders and conditions? what penalty conditions does Russia have to accept and what do you think might be Russia's response to those conditions?

[frank ryan]

I spazzed out a little. But since you want to chat about it: how far are you willing to go to restore Ukraine to its original borders and conditions? what penalty conditions does Russia have to accept and what do you think might be Russia's response to those conditions?

I don't think you are interested in genuine dialogue about this topic. I'm not the mood for unwarranted condescension.

[wally]

I don't think you are interested in genuine dialogue about this topic. I'm not the mood for unwarranted condescension.

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.

[frank ryan]

Russia just droned attacked innocent people in Romania.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe...ys-2026-05-29/

[Pelado]

Russia just droned attacked innocent people in Romania.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe...ys-2026-05-29/

That linked article seems to indicate that a Russian drone crashed in the Romanian town of Galati, which is pretty close to the border with Ukraine and Moldova. That seems a bit different than a drone attack, though maybe that's Russia's intent - plausible deniability of an attack on a NATO country.

[BlueK]

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.

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.

[wally]

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.

What do you think would be different?