Russia Offered to End War in 2022 If Ukraine Scrapped NATO Ambitions – Zelensky Party Chief

Nice fairy tale. In the meantime, we could avoid the whole thing.

 

I don't think the US has the ability to even do that currently.

 

But it does and have been for decades, "correctly" is very subjective, IMO its not just correctly its also the ONLY protection.

 

They are not unlimited, but the paltry sums required in this instance are well within our means. The claim that we can't afford it is merely cover for lack of commitment to freedom.

 

No, we look like doing the same thing as we did in Afghanistan; achieved most and nearly achieved all of our objectives
then moved our forces over to Iraq to have another war, concurrently with the war in Afghanistan, and ended up not
finishing either.

 

Agreed.....but this is beyond some posters logical capabilities here.

 

It's a fairy tale....since it's probably beyond your cognizant capabilities....Mikey.

 

Our government has become more corrupt and more authoritarian under progressives, and there does not seem to be much we can do about it. Democrats play for keeps.

 

to be fair they can always agree then be invited into the EU and sign seperate alliances with the US etc to serve the same purpose to circumvent it. pretty sure the EU has a alliance clause to

 

Why not?

 

aye...though ultimately its nothing to do with Russia what Ukraine does as its a sovereign nation. It has the right to contract with and to make alliances between whomever it likes...mr putin/Russia may well huff and puff in the background but that's his/their issue. The usual channels of diplomacy and diplomatic interaction seem now to have passed mr putin by as his grip over the Russian Federation grows ever more fierce and his grip over reality grows ever more obscure. If one believes that one can get away with anything and has no regard for the consequences or ramifications of ones actions then we have what we have; in this instance a war. The future of any agreement or relationship or interaction with mr putin should be predicated on the basis of it being done so on a whim and to all intents and purposes meaningless.
The potential for Ukraine then would/should be to consider themselves free to make whatever agreements they like as presumably they have little regard for mr putin - I make reference to putin only and not Russia as Russia has basically ceased to exist as a viable party to any agreement for next 20-30 years.

 

Did Russia offer to leave the occupied territories that it claims to have annexed, including Crimea?

Should Ukraine sign a peace deal with a known liar and manipulator who uses treaties as an opportunity to secretly prepare his next act of aggression and then breaks them under false pretenses when he decides the time is right?

 

I said currently, not correctly.

It's not 1993. Arguably the US could do all of those things and more then, but in 2023 we're a vastly weaker nation, with vastly weaker industrial and military capabilities.

 

If they were paltry sums we would be paying for them upfront rather than putting them on the national credit card.

 

Thank you for your detailed analysis.

 

See #113

 

Hmm.

"... in 2023 we're a vastly weaker nation, with vastly weaker industrial and military capabilities."

How so? Are you talking about the shift of technology manufacturing overseas since 1993? Granted, I don't know how much that would impact our military production capabilities in the event of a conflict with China. I would be surprised if our MIC allowed themselves to become so vulnerable that a war with the wrong country would mean we couldn't equip our armed forces. We still have domestic foundries and such, and of course this is increasing again with the reshoring that is taking place currently.

 

They are paid for just like all the other government expenditures. The fact that all Americans are undertaxed and we therefore run perpetual deficits is a separate topic. The central factor in this topic is lack of commitment to the cause of freedom.

 

Well yes, our shutting down our domestic industrial capability is a big part of this, but that includes military production as well. If you remember the 90's "peace dividend," we cut the size of our forces, closed bases and other facilities, but did NOT limit our overseas obligations, which is how we were so desperately strained by Iraq and Afghanistan, while the Gulf War was a relative cakewalk. We didn't do anything to correct the situation, and here we are, trying to supply ammunition to a country that wasn't even part of of our real defense commitments. If we can't supply Ukraine with enough artillery shells, then I doubt we're in a situation to fight a substantial land war with a near peer adversary.

And that's not even mentioning our inability to man an already shrunken military...

I've made these points multiple times on this forum since the war, so I doubt you are open to my arguments, but here we are anyway.

 

I would welcome tax increases that the American public knew were specifically for our overseas adventures. I think it would change the calculus of support.

 

Waah. I haven't seen you post these arguments before, so I was simply unaware of them. But on the contrary, I am very interested in meaningful contributions from you instead of the usual personal attacks and such.

I don't consider Russia a near-peer adversary, though. They just have a lot of warm bodies and a dwindling supply of inferior hardware to throw at a fight. They lack force projection capabilities beyond their limited missile options, which would only allow them to inflict some damage and terror on us from afar for a limited time before they were shut down completely.

 

Included in the state ballot are line items to raise various amounts of money for this or that.
It would be interesting to see how many voted:

$w for a war in Ukraine
$x for a war with China
$y for a war with Iran
$z to win the war in Syria

where those amounts of money are:
1. ludicrously low estimates
and 2. ludicrously huge numbers

 

How so?

 

Well the Rand Corp agrees with you, however the Air Force disagrees, so there is room to debate whether Russia is a near peer adversary or not. I'd rather not put it to the test.

 

We might have a quite different foreign policy if we were directly paying for it and knew how much we were paying.