(09-22-2022 08:36 AM)b2b Wrote:  

(09-21-2022 03:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-21-2022 02:52 PM)natibeast2.0 Wrote:  In an address to the nation on Wednesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced a partial mobilization has been decreed, making Russian citizens currently in reserve subject to conscription. The announcement comes after the self-declared Donetsk (DPR) and Luhansk People’s Republics (LPR), and eastern Ukrainian regions of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia announced plans to hold votes on joining Russia. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg called the referendum an "escalation in Putin's war." Keep it here for the latest on-the-ground updates.

Seems to me this is not a war the U.S. should be involved in anyway. Just sayin what I've said since day 1. If I turn against my original opinion and end up disagreeing with it I'll be more than happy to admit.

Honestly, I dont care about it any further than there is simply too much of a chance Putin goes after NATO nations (most likely the Baltic states) after he digests Ukraine---which would draw US servicemen directly into a war. Maybe he means the stuff about NATO---maybe he doesnt. But he's stated before that he believed certain areas should be Russian satellite states and then he used his military to try and get what he wanted (both in Georgia and Ukraine). I mean---its not like that kind of expansionist talk by your neighbor president should be taken lightly. You dont see NATO presidents regularly talking about invading Russia or its puppet states do you? In fact---pretty much everywhere you have a leader mouthing off like Putin you either have a war or at the minimum---a huge arms build up (N-S Korea, China-Taiwan, India-Pakistan, Israel-Arab nations, etc).

That said---if we were not part of NATO, Id be fine with staying out of it---though Id also have zero issues with selling Ukraine weapons to defend itself with. Thats just good old fashioned capitalism.

Selling? Capitalism? You call our government GIVING Ukraine tens of BILLIONS of dollars "Capitalism"? You can't make this crap up. Neocons here have lost their damn minds.

And the Putin lovers can’t read. I suggest you read my post again and concentrate this time. Words actually mean things. Hint—the last part of my post is hypothetical. Also, see definition of lend lease.

(09-22-2022 10:02 AM)shere khan Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 09:58 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 09:03 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(09-21-2022 02:12 PM)miko33 Wrote:  There is zero guarantee that Russia invades any other countries beyond Ukraine if they conquer it.

Except that some here think that Putin's real motivation is to create a buffer between Russia and NATO. Now he needs to conquer more. Russia annexing Ukraine, which has been their intent since Putin doesn't acknowledge Ukraine as a sovereign but as historically part of Russia, simply puts Poland on their border. A NATO country. Now they have Poland and Finland on their border.

There's a big hole in this logic though. Today's world isn't the same as the world was when Stalin was in power. If he wants his buffer with NATO, Ukraine was the answer to that. Whether Putin would have been satiated by diplomatic commitments to not admit Ukraine into NATO or he slowly gobbled up Ukraine thru annexations - same outcome because Putin has his buffer.

If Putin's goal was to have a buffer, then the further west he goes will put him closer to NATO. He wants distance between NATO and Moscow - except it's not the 60s, 70s or even the 80s anymore. Military Tech is way more sophisticated so the distance from his capitol argument doesn't apply like it did back then so he'd need a lot more territory than the Soviets did for their buffer.

The EU wants resources from UKraine plus its the money laudering center of the world. Putins worries about the prog filth globalists at his border are well warranted. it really doesnt have shite to do with Nato. Nato is the fake excuse.

How would the US react if China signed a military protection agreement with Mexico under the guise of controlling its resources.

People are stupid

If the US was on our second invasion of Mexico in a decade, it would be our own fault they sought protection. By the way, we already have a situation very similar to what you describe——it’s called Cuba and is just 90 miles from our shores. We have dealt with it, and our only demand was no foreign nukes.

(09-21-2022 08:13 PM)Todor Wrote:  

(09-21-2022 07:26 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  What a monumental waste of $$$ that we don't have.

We should have stayed completely out of it. Not our business.

But, even in this forum, you have those who continually cheer on every war the US starts as some kind of essential fight for our own survival and point to all the great news it really is.

They don’t care what the cost is. They don’t care if we have the money. The only care about carrying out a globalist agenda based in hypotheticals. Sure, let’s spend all of our money not only burning our bridges, but burning the rest of the worlds too. It’s not gonna be pretty when it stops working because more and more people hate us every day for the crap we go around pulling on people.

Sure, there are certainly people who reflexively cheer on every war the US is in. Just like there are people who reflexively cheer against the US in every war.

However, I think you're mistaken if you think anyone sees this as a fight for US survival. This is a low-cost investment to keep our self-declared enemies as far away from us as possible and to increase certainty for American investors (such as US pension funds that provide middle-class retirement savings) who invest in our close European allies.

And yes, $50 billion is low-cost. $50 billion is less than 1% of our federal budget. It's 0.2% of our GDP.

We're not dirt-poor Russians who have the same GDP/capita as Costa Rica. A country whose average income is 1/4 of the poorest state in the USA. $50 billion is a drop in the bucket for us.

(09-22-2022 01:20 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(09-21-2022 08:13 PM)Todor Wrote:  

(09-21-2022 07:26 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  What a monumental waste of $$$ that we don't have.

We should have stayed completely out of it. Not our business.

But, even in this forum, you have those who continually cheer on every war the US starts as some kind of essential fight for our own survival and point to all the great news it really is.

They don’t care what the cost is. They don’t care if we have the money. The only care about carrying out a globalist agenda based in hypotheticals. Sure, let’s spend all of our money not only burning our bridges, but burning the rest of the worlds too. It’s not gonna be pretty when it stops working because more and more people hate us every day for the crap we go around pulling on people.

Sure, there are certainly people who reflexively cheer on every war the US is in. Just like there are people who reflexively cheer against the US in every war.

However, I think you're mistaken if you think anyone sees this as a fight for US survival. This is a low-cost investment to keep our self-declared enemies as far away from us as possible and to increase certainty for American investors (such as US pension funds that provide middle-class retirement savings) who invest in our close European allies.

And yes, $50 billion is low-cost. $50 billion is less than 1% of our federal budget. It's 0.2% of our GDP.

We're not dirt-poor Russians who have the same GDP/capita as Costa Rica. A country whose average income is 1/4 of the poorest state in the USA. $50 billion is a drop in the bucket for us.

Well framed. Thanks for posting.

(09-22-2022 10:51 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 08:36 AM)b2b Wrote:  

(09-21-2022 03:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-21-2022 02:52 PM)natibeast2.0 Wrote:  In an address to the nation on Wednesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced a partial mobilization has been decreed, making Russian citizens currently in reserve subject to conscription. The announcement comes after the self-declared Donetsk (DPR) and Luhansk People’s Republics (LPR), and eastern Ukrainian regions of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia announced plans to hold votes on joining Russia. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg called the referendum an "escalation in Putin's war." Keep it here for the latest on-the-ground updates.

Seems to me this is not a war the U.S. should be involved in anyway. Just sayin what I've said since day 1. If I turn against my original opinion and end up disagreeing with it I'll be more than happy to admit.

Honestly, I dont care about it any further than there is simply too much of a chance Putin goes after NATO nations (most likely the Baltic states) after he digests Ukraine---which would draw US servicemen directly into a war. Maybe he means the stuff about NATO---maybe he doesnt. But he's stated before that he believed certain areas should be Russian satellite states and then he used his military to try and get what he wanted (both in Georgia and Ukraine). I mean---its not like that kind of expansionist talk by your neighbor president should be taken lightly. You dont see NATO presidents regularly talking about invading Russia or its puppet states do you? In fact---pretty much everywhere you have a leader mouthing off like Putin you either have a war or at the minimum---a huge arms build up (N-S Korea, China-Taiwan, India-Pakistan, Israel-Arab nations, etc).

That said---if we were not part of NATO, Id be fine with staying out of it---though Id also have zero issues with selling Ukraine weapons to defend itself with. Thats just good old fashioned capitalism.

Selling? Capitalism? You call our government GIVING Ukraine tens of BILLIONS of dollars "Capitalism"? You can't make this crap up. Neocons here have lost their damn minds.

And the Putin lovers can’t read. I suggest you read my post again and concentrate this time. Words actually mean things. Hint—the last part of my post is hypothetical. Also, see definition of lend lease.

name one frickin putin lover. thats a weak argument when you dont have anything.

nobody loves putin. im not so sure a bunch here wouldnt give zelinsky some sugar.

(09-22-2022 01:41 PM)shere khan Wrote:  name one frickin putin lover. thats a weak argument when you dont have anything.

nobody loves putin. im not so sure a bunch here wouldnt give zelinsky some sugar.

Your posts on this subject have been pretty consistent: Criticism of Ukraine and its supporters, skepticism of positive Ukrainian news, and "no good guys here". Not sure I've seen any other criticism of Putin or Russia from you. Maybe the russian bot can chime in and make your case.

I don't really have a dog in this hunt (whether or not we should support Ukraine) but I do find Putin to be a pain in the ass and I'm encouraged that he has exposed Russia's shortcomings in this "action", likely hamstringing his ability to do more conventional-warfare damage going forward.

Russia has an existential demographic problem: They're getting very old very quickly and have a low birth rate. Relatively soon they will have more consumers than producers. It's going to crush them economically and destroy their military, among other things. That's a much better explanation for Russia's aggression than "de-nazification" or "NATO provocation". But it also gives an indication that: 1) he's not going to nuke or otherwise level Ukraine because he needs it, and 2) he's not going to be finished when he's done in Ukraine. With its current demographic trajectory Russia will need to expand beyond Ukraine to be confident of security. Hence the talk about Poland, Moldova, etc.

(09-22-2022 03:17 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 01:41 PM)shere khan Wrote:  name one frickin putin lover. thats a weak argument when you dont have anything.

nobody loves putin. im not so sure a bunch here wouldnt give zelinsky some sugar.

Your posts on this subject have been pretty consistent: Criticism of Ukraine and its supporters, skepticism of positive Ukrainian news, and "no good guys here". Not sure I've seen any other criticism of Putin or Russia from you. Maybe the russian bot can chime in and make your case.

I don't really have a dog in this hunt (whether or not we should support Ukraine) but I do find Putin to be a pain in the ass and I'm encouraged that he has exposed Russia's shortcomings in this "action", likely hamstringing his ability to do more conventional-warfare damage going forward.

Russia has an existential demographic problem: They're getting very old very quickly and have a low birth rate. Relatively soon they will have more consumers than producers. It's going to crush them economically and destroy their military, among other things. That's a much better explanation for Russia's aggression than "de-nazification" or "NATO provocation". But it also gives an indication that: 1) he's not going to nuke or otherwise level Ukraine because he needs it, and 2) he's not going to be finished when he's done in Ukraine. With its current demographic trajectory Russia will need to expand beyond Ukraine to be confident of security. Hence the talk about Poland, Moldova, etc.

Putin is not a dummy. He should have been well aware that 1) Russia already lost due to demographics alone, 2) Corruption is rampant and that the military itself was in suboptimal shape given the questionable munitions and equipment along with the poor training of volunteers in peace time and 3) That a lack of an effective NCO cadre within the Russian military put them at a tactical disadvantage against NATO (U.S. in particular) and 4) The poor state of the manufacturing and technology sectors that have made them highly reliant on western made chips and other tech for their best weapons.

I can understand how he could have thrown caution to the wind and went after Ukraine thinking he'd take them out before NATO could have done much of anything to thwart him. Especially with the demographic collapse alone his army has a shelf life before it starts to unravel. But by the time he saw quite early in the war that Ukrainian resistance plus limited NATO arms transfers seriously hurt the invasion force...he should have stopped, secured the breakaway areas and declared their special mission over and then annexed the areas and called it a day. With what little he saw of the war very early on, he KNEW that it was a pipedream to take over Ukraine completely, secured it and then press on into Poland.

I don't understand what is driving Putin to continue this war. He's repeatedly showing the weaknesses of the Russian military from personnel, how it's structured and the poor defense industry in his own country.

(09-22-2022 04:38 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 03:17 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 01:41 PM)shere khan Wrote:  name one frickin putin lover. thats a weak argument when you dont have anything.

nobody loves putin. im not so sure a bunch here wouldnt give zelinsky some sugar.

Your posts on this subject have been pretty consistent: Criticism of Ukraine and its supporters, skepticism of positive Ukrainian news, and "no good guys here". Not sure I've seen any other criticism of Putin or Russia from you. Maybe the russian bot can chime in and make your case.

I don't really have a dog in this hunt (whether or not we should support Ukraine) but I do find Putin to be a pain in the ass and I'm encouraged that he has exposed Russia's shortcomings in this "action", likely hamstringing his ability to do more conventional-warfare damage going forward.

Russia has an existential demographic problem: They're getting very old very quickly and have a low birth rate. Relatively soon they will have more consumers than producers. It's going to crush them economically and destroy their military, among other things. That's a much better explanation for Russia's aggression than "de-nazification" or "NATO provocation". But it also gives an indication that: 1) he's not going to nuke or otherwise level Ukraine because he needs it, and 2) he's not going to be finished when he's done in Ukraine. With its current demographic trajectory Russia will need to expand beyond Ukraine to be confident of security. Hence the talk about Poland, Moldova, etc.

Putin is not a dummy. He should have been well aware that 1) Russia already lost due to demographics alone, 2) Corruption is rampant and that the military itself was in suboptimal shape given the questionable munitions and equipment along with the poor training of volunteers in peace time and 3) That a lack of an effective NCO cadre within the Russian military put them at a tactical disadvantage against NATO (U.S. in particular) and 4) The poor state of the manufacturing and technology sectors that have made them highly reliant on western made chips and other tech for their best weapons.

I can understand how he could have thrown caution to the wind and went after Ukraine thinking he'd take them out before NATO could have done much of anything to thwart him. Especially with the demographic collapse alone his army has a shelf life before it starts to unravel. But by the time he saw quite early in the war that Ukrainian resistance plus limited NATO arms transfers seriously hurt the invasion force...he should have stopped, secured the breakaway areas and declared their special mission over and then annexed the areas and called it a day. With what little he saw of the war very early on, he KNEW that it was a pipedream to take over Ukraine completely, secured it and then press on into Poland.

I don't understand what is driving Putin to continue this war. He's repeatedly showing the weaknesses of the Russian military from personnel, how it's structured and the poor defense industry in his own country.

Ive thought about this was well and I keep coming back to only two possible answers.

Possibility One--There is something physically wrong with Putin and he is simply not the same Putin we have been dealing with prior to this war. Maybe the isolation due to Covid affected him mentally---but the old Putin would have exacted most of what he wanted by leveraging the tremendous negotiating advantage he had created for himself in January. Remember, at that time he had checkmated the west as his troops had surrounded Ukraine and it was assumed that NATO and Ukraine could do little to stop him. He could have probably negotiated about 90% of what he wanted without even firing a shot at that point. The old Putin would have robbed the west at the negotiating table and kept his forces 100% intact.

Possibility Two---Putin has become so isolated and has punished so many underlings for bringing him bad news that he no longer is getting good information with which to make decisions. I think he was convinced that he would win in Ukraine in days (a mistake that is excusable because most people believed that), but the issue is he had no idea that his army wasnt ready to go. Clearly, nobody told him that you cant invade on the spur of the moment and give your army planners only 24 hours notice prior to the invasion. Invading armies need supplies and the Russian Army, that is already not particularly good at logistics, were never going to be logistically ready to invade anyone on short notice. Clearly---nobody told Putin this----and its possible nobody is still giving Putin the true situation on the ground in Ukraine. Regardless---at this point, he may feel politically he has no choice but to continue--regardless of how bad it is. If he can hang to the Donbas and Crimea through the winter----he could potentially swing a negotiated settlement creating some sort of autonomous regions in the Donbas and Crimea---and then declare a "mission accomplished" victory. The problem there is for Ukraine to sign onto any negotiated peace---there will need to be a rock solid article 5 like security guarantee from the a coalition of western nuclear nations---likely a group that includes the US, France, and the UK (likely Poland and Germany as well).

(09-22-2022 04:56 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 04:38 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 03:17 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 01:41 PM)shere khan Wrote:  name one frickin putin lover. thats a weak argument when you dont have anything.

nobody loves putin. im not so sure a bunch here wouldnt give zelinsky some sugar.

Your posts on this subject have been pretty consistent: Criticism of Ukraine and its supporters, skepticism of positive Ukrainian news, and "no good guys here". Not sure I've seen any other criticism of Putin or Russia from you. Maybe the russian bot can chime in and make your case.

I don't really have a dog in this hunt (whether or not we should support Ukraine) but I do find Putin to be a pain in the ass and I'm encouraged that he has exposed Russia's shortcomings in this "action", likely hamstringing his ability to do more conventional-warfare damage going forward.

Russia has an existential demographic problem: They're getting very old very quickly and have a low birth rate. Relatively soon they will have more consumers than producers. It's going to crush them economically and destroy their military, among other things. That's a much better explanation for Russia's aggression than "de-nazification" or "NATO provocation". But it also gives an indication that: 1) he's not going to nuke or otherwise level Ukraine because he needs it, and 2) he's not going to be finished when he's done in Ukraine. With its current demographic trajectory Russia will need to expand beyond Ukraine to be confident of security. Hence the talk about Poland, Moldova, etc.

Putin is not a dummy. He should have been well aware that 1) Russia already lost due to demographics alone, 2) Corruption is rampant and that the military itself was in suboptimal shape given the questionable munitions and equipment along with the poor training of volunteers in peace time and 3) That a lack of an effective NCO cadre within the Russian military put them at a tactical disadvantage against NATO (U.S. in particular) and 4) The poor state of the manufacturing and technology sectors that have made them highly reliant on western made chips and other tech for their best weapons.

I can understand how he could have thrown caution to the wind and went after Ukraine thinking he'd take them out before NATO could have done much of anything to thwart him. Especially with the demographic collapse alone his army has a shelf life before it starts to unravel. But by the time he saw quite early in the war that Ukrainian resistance plus limited NATO arms transfers seriously hurt the invasion force...he should have stopped, secured the breakaway areas and declared their special mission over and then annexed the areas and called it a day. With what little he saw of the war very early on, he KNEW that it was a pipedream to take over Ukraine completely, secured it and then press on into Poland.

I don't understand what is driving Putin to continue this war. He's repeatedly showing the weaknesses of the Russian military from personnel, how it's structured and the poor defense industry in his own country.

Ive thought about this was well and I keep coming back to only two possible answers.

Possibility One--There is something physically wrong with Putin and he is simply not the same Putin we have been dealing with prior to this war. Maybe the isolation due to Covid affected him mentally---but the old Putin would have exacted most of what he wanted by leveraging the tremendous negotiating advantage he had created for himself in January. Remember, at that time he had checkmated the west as his troops had surrounded Ukraine and it was assumed that NATO and Ukraine could do little to stop him. He could have probably negotiated about 90% of what he wanted without even firing a shot at that point. The old Putin would have robbed the west at the negotiating table and kept his forces 100% intact.

Possibility Two---Putin has become so isolated and has punished so many underlings for bringing him bad news that he no longer is getting good information with which to make decisions. I think he was convinced that he would win in Ukraine in days (a mistake that is excusable because most people believed that), but the issue is he had no idea that his army wasnt ready to go. Clearly, nobody told him that you cant invade on the spur of the moment and give your army planners only 24 hours notice prior to the invasion. Invading armies need supplies and the Russian Army, that is already not particularly good at logistics, were never going to be logistically ready to invade anyone on short notice. Clearly---nobody told Putin this----and its possible nobody is still giving Putin the true situation on the ground in Ukraine. Regardless---at this point, he may feel politically he has no choice but to continue--regardless of how bad it is. If he can hang to the Donbas and Crimea through the winter----he could potentially swing a negotiated settlement creating some sort of autonomous regions in the Donbas and Crimea---and then declare a "mission accomplished" victory. The problem there is for Ukraine to sign onto any negotiated peace---there will need to be a rock solid article 5 like security guarantee from the a coalition of western nuclear nations---likely a group that includes the US, France, and the UK (likely Poland and Germany as well).

I'd add a third possibility - It didn't matter if his army was unprepared. If he believes Russia's demography is truly an existential crisis, he might believe this is his last opportunity to keep the country (as he knows it, anyway) from collapsing.

(09-22-2022 04:56 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 04:38 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 03:17 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 01:41 PM)shere khan Wrote:  name one frickin putin lover. thats a weak argument when you dont have anything.

nobody loves putin. im not so sure a bunch here wouldnt give zelinsky some sugar.

Your posts on this subject have been pretty consistent: Criticism of Ukraine and its supporters, skepticism of positive Ukrainian news, and "no good guys here". Not sure I've seen any other criticism of Putin or Russia from you. Maybe the russian bot can chime in and make your case.

I don't really have a dog in this hunt (whether or not we should support Ukraine) but I do find Putin to be a pain in the ass and I'm encouraged that he has exposed Russia's shortcomings in this "action", likely hamstringing his ability to do more conventional-warfare damage going forward.

Russia has an existential demographic problem: They're getting very old very quickly and have a low birth rate. Relatively soon they will have more consumers than producers. It's going to crush them economically and destroy their military, among other things. That's a much better explanation for Russia's aggression than "de-nazification" or "NATO provocation". But it also gives an indication that: 1) he's not going to nuke or otherwise level Ukraine because he needs it, and 2) he's not going to be finished when he's done in Ukraine. With its current demographic trajectory Russia will need to expand beyond Ukraine to be confident of security. Hence the talk about Poland, Moldova, etc.

Putin is not a dummy. He should have been well aware that 1) Russia already lost due to demographics alone, 2) Corruption is rampant and that the military itself was in suboptimal shape given the questionable munitions and equipment along with the poor training of volunteers in peace time and 3) That a lack of an effective NCO cadre within the Russian military put them at a tactical disadvantage against NATO (U.S. in particular) and 4) The poor state of the manufacturing and technology sectors that have made them highly reliant on western made chips and other tech for their best weapons.

I can understand how he could have thrown caution to the wind and went after Ukraine thinking he'd take them out before NATO could have done much of anything to thwart him. Especially with the demographic collapse alone his army has a shelf life before it starts to unravel. But by the time he saw quite early in the war that Ukrainian resistance plus limited NATO arms transfers seriously hurt the invasion force...he should have stopped, secured the breakaway areas and declared their special mission over and then annexed the areas and called it a day. With what little he saw of the war very early on, he KNEW that it was a pipedream to take over Ukraine completely, secured it and then press on into Poland.

I don't understand what is driving Putin to continue this war. He's repeatedly showing the weaknesses of the Russian military from personnel, how it's structured and the poor defense industry in his own country.

Ive thought about this was well and I keep coming back to only two possible answers.

Possibility One--There is something physically wrong with Putin and he is simply not the same Putin we have been dealing with prior to this war. Maybe the isolation due to Covid affected him mentally---but the old Putin would have exacted most of what he wanted by leveraging the tremendous negotiating advantage he had created for himself in January. Remember, at that time he had checkmated the west as his troops had surrounded Ukraine and it was assumed that NATO and Ukraine could do little to stop him. He could have probably negotiated about 90% of what he wanted without even firing a shot at that point. The old Putin would have robbed the west at the negotiating table and kept his forces 100% intact.

Possibility Two---Putin has become so isolated and has punished so many underlings for bringing him bad news that he no longer is getting good information with which to make decisions. I think he was convinced that he would win in Ukraine in days (a mistake that is excusable because most people believed that), but the issue is he had no idea that his army wasnt ready to go. Clearly, nobody told him that you cant invade on the spur of the moment and give your army planners only 24 hours notice prior to the invasion. Invading armies need supplies and the Russian Army, that is already not particularly good at logistics, were never going to be logistically ready to invade anyone on short notice. Clearly---nobody told Putin this----and its possible nobody is still giving Putin the true situation on the ground in Ukraine. Regardless---at this point, he may feel politically he has no choice but to continue--regardless of how bad it is. If he can hang to the Donbas and Crimea through the winter----he could potentially swing a negotiated settlement creating some sort of autonomous regions in the Donbas and Crimea---and then declare a "mission accomplished" victory. The problem there is for Ukraine to sign onto any negotiated peace---there will need to be a rock solid article 5 like security guarantee from the a coalition of western nuclear nations---likely a group that includes the US, France, and the UK (likely Poland and Germany as well).

Its a combination of #2 with his giant ego and being used to getting his way on everything.

(09-22-2022 05:28 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 04:56 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Ive thought about this was well and I keep coming back to only two possible answers.
Possibility One--There is something physically wrong with Putin and he is simply not the same Putin we have been dealing with prior to this war. Maybe the isolation due to Covid affected him mentally---but the old Putin would have exacted most of what he wanted by leveraging the tremendous negotiating advantage he had created for himself in January. Remember, at that time he had checkmated the west as his troops had surrounded Ukraine and it was assumed that NATO and Ukraine could do little to stop him. He could have probably negotiated about 90% of what he wanted without even firing a shot at that point. The old Putin would have robbed the west at the negotiating table and kept his forces 100% intact.
Possibility Two---Putin has become so isolated and has punished so many underlings for bringing him bad news that he no longer is getting good information with which to make decisions. I think he was convinced that he would win in Ukraine in days (a mistake that is excusable because most people believed that), but the issue is he had no idea that his army wasnt ready to go. Clearly, nobody told him that you cant invade on the spur of the moment and give your army planners only 24 hours notice prior to the invasion. Invading armies need supplies and the Russian Army, that is already not particularly good at logistics, were never going to be logistically ready to invade anyone on short notice. Clearly---nobody told Putin this----and its possible nobody is still giving Putin the true situation on the ground in Ukraine. Regardless---at this point, he may feel politically he has no choice but to continue--regardless of how bad it is. If he can hang to the Donbas and Crimea through the winter----he could potentially swing a negotiated settlement creating some sort of autonomous regions in the Donbas and Crimea---and then declare a "mission accomplished" victory. The problem there is for Ukraine to sign onto any negotiated peace---there will need to be a rock solid article 5 like security guarantee from the a coalition of western nuclear nations---likely a group that includes the US, France, and the UK (likely Poland and Germany as well).

I'd add a third possibility - It didn't matter if his army was unprepared. If he believes Russia's demography is truly an existential crisis, he might believe this is his last opportunity to keep the country (as he knows it, anyway) from collapsing.

I tend toward possibility three.

All this Russia worrying going on. If only the CIA would stop color revolutioning countries and creating chaos for other people. Th “get Russia” obsession is costing us loads.

(09-21-2022 02:19 PM)Todor Wrote:  

(09-21-2022 11:19 AM)shere khan Wrote:  

(09-21-2022 11:09 AM)mlb Wrote:  

(09-21-2022 10:39 AM)shere khan Wrote:  What nato country is russia attacking?

Again... it is cheaper to arm Ukraine than for us to call up hundreds of thousands of soldiers and put them in the NATO countries of Europe.

Again. No it is not. Donate your paycheck if you feel so strongly.

Nato is not being attacked

Worst part is, when Victoria Nuland was bragging about having already “invested” billions in the coup preparations, and from 2014 on we spent billions more preparing Ukraine to try capture Donbas and then Crimea, those were just the normal course of business for us. Just casually dropping billions in places around the world to cause trouble that we then continue to find once we get it ignited.

It’s all part of the plan people. It’s standard operating procedure. But the worst part is we are doing to the same thing in Taiwan, trying to bring that that to head just like we did in Syria and Ukraine. And a decade from now, we will also know all of the places we are currently spending additional billions doing the exact same thing. Ukraine is not something that just came up or just happened to work out this way. This is what we do around the world and there is nothing we can do to stop it because the people don’t have any say. All we do is pay for it.

I find it hard to argue with your logic.

(09-22-2022 07:21 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 05:28 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 04:56 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Ive thought about this was well and I keep coming back to only two possible answers.
Possibility One--There is something physically wrong with Putin and he is simply not the same Putin we have been dealing with prior to this war. Maybe the isolation due to Covid affected him mentally---but the old Putin would have exacted most of what he wanted by leveraging the tremendous negotiating advantage he had created for himself in January. Remember, at that time he had checkmated the west as his troops had surrounded Ukraine and it was assumed that NATO and Ukraine could do little to stop him. He could have probably negotiated about 90% of what he wanted without even firing a shot at that point. The old Putin would have robbed the west at the negotiating table and kept his forces 100% intact.
Possibility Two---Putin has become so isolated and has punished so many underlings for bringing him bad news that he no longer is getting good information with which to make decisions. I think he was convinced that he would win in Ukraine in days (a mistake that is excusable because most people believed that), but the issue is he had no idea that his army wasnt ready to go. Clearly, nobody told him that you cant invade on the spur of the moment and give your army planners only 24 hours notice prior to the invasion. Invading armies need supplies and the Russian Army, that is already not particularly good at logistics, were never going to be logistically ready to invade anyone on short notice. Clearly---nobody told Putin this----and its possible nobody is still giving Putin the true situation on the ground in Ukraine. Regardless---at this point, he may feel politically he has no choice but to continue--regardless of how bad it is. If he can hang to the Donbas and Crimea through the winter----he could potentially swing a negotiated settlement creating some sort of autonomous regions in the Donbas and Crimea---and then declare a "mission accomplished" victory. The problem there is for Ukraine to sign onto any negotiated peace---there will need to be a rock solid article 5 like security guarantee from the a coalition of western nuclear nations---likely a group that includes the US, France, and the UK (likely Poland and Germany as well).

I'd add a third possibility - It didn't matter if his army was unprepared. If he believes Russia's demography is truly an existential crisis, he might believe this is his last opportunity to keep the country (as he knows it, anyway) from collapsing.

I tend toward possibility three.

So this poor planning, war hungry, unstable evil maniac is now worried about birth rates and demographics after he will long be dead.

Ok



FFS

A month ago he was terminally ill and unstable.

Now he is waging war because people arent having babies.

Dammit man.

I see mobilization is going well.

Some won't be happy until we have boots on the ground directly involved in this conflict. I've had to change my way of thinking about this issue and I now think, as I once did, that we have no business playing the role of the worlds policemen. We have been involved either directly or indirectly in some conflict or another across the globe for most of my life. None of it has benefitted me personally or the vast majority of the American people.

(09-22-2022 08:05 PM)Todor Wrote:  If only the CIA would stop color revolutioning countries and creating chaos for other people.

In Eisenhower’s time, there was an unsuccessful coup-attempt somewhere in a country (Indonesia? I forget) that had anti-US leadership. Ike did not acknowledge any American involvement, but William Buckley’s magazine National Review said that the fiasco “has all the markings of a CIA operation: everyone got killed except the appointed victim.”

(09-22-2022 05:28 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 04:56 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 04:38 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 03:17 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 01:41 PM)shere khan Wrote:  name one frickin putin lover. thats a weak argument when you dont have anything.

nobody loves putin. im not so sure a bunch here wouldnt give zelinsky some sugar.

Your posts on this subject have been pretty consistent: Criticism of Ukraine and its supporters, skepticism of positive Ukrainian news, and "no good guys here". Not sure I've seen any other criticism of Putin or Russia from you. Maybe the russian bot can chime in and make your case.

I don't really have a dog in this hunt (whether or not we should support Ukraine) but I do find Putin to be a pain in the ass and I'm encouraged that he has exposed Russia's shortcomings in this "action", likely hamstringing his ability to do more conventional-warfare damage going forward.

Russia has an existential demographic problem: They're getting very old very quickly and have a low birth rate. Relatively soon they will have more consumers than producers. It's going to crush them economically and destroy their military, among other things. That's a much better explanation for Russia's aggression than "de-nazification" or "NATO provocation". But it also gives an indication that: 1) he's not going to nuke or otherwise level Ukraine because he needs it, and 2) he's not going to be finished when he's done in Ukraine. With its current demographic trajectory Russia will need to expand beyond Ukraine to be confident of security. Hence the talk about Poland, Moldova, etc.

Putin is not a dummy. He should have been well aware that 1) Russia already lost due to demographics alone, 2) Corruption is rampant and that the military itself was in suboptimal shape given the questionable munitions and equipment along with the poor training of volunteers in peace time and 3) That a lack of an effective NCO cadre within the Russian military put them at a tactical disadvantage against NATO (U.S. in particular) and 4) The poor state of the manufacturing and technology sectors that have made them highly reliant on western made chips and other tech for their best weapons.

I can understand how he could have thrown caution to the wind and went after Ukraine thinking he'd take them out before NATO could have done much of anything to thwart him. Especially with the demographic collapse alone his army has a shelf life before it starts to unravel. But by the time he saw quite early in the war that Ukrainian resistance plus limited NATO arms transfers seriously hurt the invasion force...he should have stopped, secured the breakaway areas and declared their special mission over and then annexed the areas and called it a day. With what little he saw of the war very early on, he KNEW that it was a pipedream to take over Ukraine completely, secured it and then press on into Poland.

I don't understand what is driving Putin to continue this war. He's repeatedly showing the weaknesses of the Russian military from personnel, how it's structured and the poor defense industry in his own country.

Ive thought about this was well and I keep coming back to only two possible answers.

Possibility One--There is something physically wrong with Putin and he is simply not the same Putin we have been dealing with prior to this war. Maybe the isolation due to Covid affected him mentally---but the old Putin would have exacted most of what he wanted by leveraging the tremendous negotiating advantage he had created for himself in January. Remember, at that time he had checkmated the west as his troops had surrounded Ukraine and it was assumed that NATO and Ukraine could do little to stop him. He could have probably negotiated about 90% of what he wanted without even firing a shot at that point. The old Putin would have robbed the west at the negotiating table and kept his forces 100% intact.

Possibility Two---Putin has become so isolated and has punished so many underlings for bringing him bad news that he no longer is getting good information with which to make decisions. I think he was convinced that he would win in Ukraine in days (a mistake that is excusable because most people believed that), but the issue is he had no idea that his army wasnt ready to go. Clearly, nobody told him that you cant invade on the spur of the moment and give your army planners only 24 hours notice prior to the invasion. Invading armies need supplies and the Russian Army, that is already not particularly good at logistics, were never going to be logistically ready to invade anyone on short notice. Clearly---nobody told Putin this----and its possible nobody is still giving Putin the true situation on the ground in Ukraine. Regardless---at this point, he may feel politically he has no choice but to continue--regardless of how bad it is. If he can hang to the Donbas and Crimea through the winter----he could potentially swing a negotiated settlement creating some sort of autonomous regions in the Donbas and Crimea---and then declare a "mission accomplished" victory. The problem there is for Ukraine to sign onto any negotiated peace---there will need to be a rock solid article 5 like security guarantee from the a coalition of western nuclear nations---likely a group that includes the US, France, and the UK (likely Poland and Germany as well).

I'd add a third possibility - It didn't matter if his army was unprepared. If he believes Russia's demography is truly an existential crisis, he might believe this is his last opportunity to keep the country (as he knows it, anyway) from collapsing.

That third possibility is my opinion of the overarching reason war would have started eventually by Russia. Their backs are against the wall in numerous areas before the war started if your looking at 100+ year outlook of a people and land.

(09-22-2022 08:29 PM)shere khan Wrote:  So this poor planning, war hungry, unstable evil maniac is now worried about birth rates and demographics after he will long be dead.

No, the demographics issues are far more immediate, and have been well known for some time.

You may remember that demographics were one factor in the breakup of the Soviet Union. The Asian Muslims were having babies and the Russian Slavs weren't. The USSR was swinging toward becoming majority Muslim by perhaps mid-century, and the 20-something age range that forms the backbone of the military was going to get there some time around now. So they jettisoned all the Stans--Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan. That got rid of the Muslim dominance issue, but the Slavic birth rate remained at or below replacement. That means that sometime in the next decade or so, the Russian army is not sustainable. So Putin has to move quickly, if at all. It as been expected for some time that he would be at his most dangerous between now and 2030. The extremely poor showing by the Russian army in Ukraine--the've made the Charge of the Light Brigade look like a smashing victory--has raised questions as to whether this is the dying gasp of Russian military power.

I'm not really sure where Putin goes from here. I don't see many options.

(09-22-2022 08:30 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I see mobilization is going well.

Lol—no doubt another devious CIA plot making all those healthy young Russian patriots run to the Airport.