Comments on: On Ukraine today

By: om

om — Sun, 05 Jun 2022 21:58:10 +0000

Bunge and Geoffrey:

An hour of analysis on the Ukrainian resistance to Vlad’s aggression (aka war) and prognosis. Warning, he isn’t a Vlad apologist.

Perun

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sSPhOWDkcPk
.

By: om

om — Sun, 05 Jun 2022 19:52:52 +0000

It seems that Roosia as presently goverened is an existential threat to Ukraine, Eastern Europe, and the Baltics; not to be trusted to abide by agreements, borders, or treaties. After all Greater Russia must be restored.

But, but, but NATO.

By: AesopFan

AesopFan — Sun, 05 Jun 2022 06:19:33 +0000

@ miguel > “tell me how this ends, seriously, not what you wish will happen, but what is likely to happen,”

This is one of the better analyses that I’ve read to date.
Whether he’s correct or not only time will tell, but he lays out the options fairly so far as I can tell. (h/t PowerlineBlog)

https://quillette.com/2022/06/04/zelenskys-terrible-choice-and-ours/
Zelensky’s Terrible Dilemma—and Ours
Capitulation or Bloody Resistance? by John Lloyd

By: om

om — Sun, 05 Jun 2022 05:13:09 +0000

For Geoffrey and Bunge:

How the western Intelligence Community (and the Colonel MacWrongs) totally misjudged the Russian military capabilities (western politicians were no better judges, Brandon, et al).

Not that Geoffrey or Bunge would know any of this.

You think Ukraine is corrupt? Think about the Roosian military and the oligarchs under Vlad.

But, but, but, NATO!

Was Vlad to stupid to know how bad his armed froces really were?

Military History not Visualized

Why were we so wrong about Russia?

https://youtu.be/tlwNgFmNEI8

By: miguel cervantes

miguel cervantes — Sat, 04 Jun 2022 22:39:30 +0000

tell me how this ends, seriously, not what you wish will happen, but what is likely to happen, walter cronkite lied about the tet offensive, but as sam adams noted, westmoreland’s intel chief general graham ignored evidence of vietcong massing,
how much is europe spending in it’s own backyards,

By: Oldflyer

Oldflyer — Sat, 04 Jun 2022 22:23:47 +0000

I agree, Chester Draws. Any cost to us from applying sanctions is trivial and temporary in the scheme of things. Of course even that could have been mitigated through reasonable actions by our government. Instead, I perceive, rightly or wrongly, that the government is using the cover of Ukraine to squeeze our economy into submission.

That aside, what are a people who proclaim, or pretend, to be moral to do in the face of naked aggression? (Am I the only one willing to use that term?) There used to be a term called the “domino theory”. Ironically, critics decried that theory when the U.S. tried to draw a line in Vietnam; after watching it at work in Eastern Europe, and Korea in the aftermath of WWII. Without using the words, Putin has resurrected the theory. We best not ignore him.

By: Chester Draws

Chester Draws — Sat, 04 Jun 2022 21:20:25 +0000

but this gambit has so far been much more detrimental to us, than t and the solvency of the West in general, than to Putin

You could not be more wrong it you tried.

Russia has an economy the size of Italy’s. Less now, with sanctions.

The cost of the destroyed military hardware alone is astronomical. Unless they also want a military the size of Italy’s, it will take most of their government budget for decades to rebuild. Meanwhile the best and brightest of Russia will leave a country clearly heading down a dark path. The Russian economy, already not great because of Putin’s control, is in tatters.

Meanwhile the sanctions have caused the price of gas to go up a bit, some food to be more expensive and some tech firms to lose sales. The difference to us in the West is minor, if only because in a couple of years new supply will replace them. It does allow politicians to deflect blame for inflation from their policies, but we shouldn’t believe them.

By: miguel cervantes

miguel cervantes — Sat, 04 Jun 2022 18:46:30 +0000

we assess reality vs desired outcomes, I still don’t understand why Putin chose to engage in this, but this gambit has so far been much more detrimental to us, than t and the solvency of the West in general, than to Putin, that becomes clearer every day, and the countersigns I illustrate above suggest it’s not about weakening Putin, but another agenda entirely, not unlike the circumstances that brought Putin to power, with the stripping and redistribution of much of the economy, in the Yeltsin era, and one can’t help this meshes perfectly with the Left’s greater plan to post industrial transformation, in the other threads,

By: neo

neo — Sat, 04 Jun 2022 18:39:50 +0000

Mighuel cervantes:

MacGregor was not right. No one has ever said he is wrong in predicting that ultimately it’s highly possible Russia will gain some Ukrainian territory. If that’s all he was saying, he wouldn’t have stood out in any way and it’s highly possible he wouldn’t have been wrong. His distinction – and this is what he was wrong about over and over and over – was in predicting very early dates for Ukrainian capitulation and Russian victory. He’s been wrong every time and yet very sure of himself, and I don’t think he’s ever acknowledged how wrong he’s been – he just moves the date forward a little bit.

By: ObloodyHell

ObloodyHell — Sat, 04 Jun 2022 18:36:34 +0000

}}} “Ukraine is all-rightous and what not” is a mocking mischaracterization. Mockery and Straw Men are the PostModern Left's primary weapons. This manages to be both. It's efficient. Disingenuous, dishonest, and lacking in any semblance of reason, wit, or argumentative talent. But it is efficient...