Russia annexes Donbas territories; maybe two can play at that game

Is this crazy enough to work, in order to stave off disaster? Russia holds a sham referendum and it results in Russia claiming new vast territories as their own, the bastards! The USA stands firmly behind the old national boundaries, per signed accords, now blatantly violated by Putin et al. Ukraine isn't part of NATO so the West is limited what it can do to hold the fort so-to-speak. Here is my solution: Zelensky agrees to sell Ukraine to us, the USA; perhaps founded on the basis of a referendum, actual or presumed. Now we can defend our new territory with true gusto and Putin will have to back down, due to the USA (along with all of Nato) being so very strong. After Crimea and Donbas are retaken and peace reestablished, we sell Ukraine back to the Zelensky regime and it returns to being an independent Western-styled democracy. Eventually Ukraine demands and receives full reparations from Russia as well. What say you?

 

No thanks. We don't want to own Ukraine. We just want them to fight our war for us.

 

Russia isn't invading the United States. Ukraine is fighting for their right to exist seperate from Russia.

 

Sure, it's all fun and games until the nukes start cooking off.

What if Putin Nukes Ukraine?



There are low yield nuclear shells that can be fired from howitzers that aren't dangerous to folks beyond a 1/2 mile from the impact. If Putin starts lobbing those, we are going to put US cities at risk for a nuclear exchange? Do you really think so? Do you really think Putin won't do this if he is pushed hard enough?

Say Putin demonstrates by blowing a nuke high overhead an unpopulated area of Ukraine.

'Atomic fallout, that occurs only if the detonations' fireball touches the surface of the earth. so fallout is fully avoidable. Absent fallout, you still get what is called downwind radiation hazard, but the effects of this are more attenuated than of fallout (although DWR is not negligible by any means). So, after such a detonation, the Russians irradiated a small area of dirt in UKR with zero to few persons killed or affected and practically no infrastructure damage. Obviously, Putin would be signaling to show that a second attack will be more powerful and harshly located. And UKR and NATO would have to take that demonstration shot very seriously.'



And that transformer is toast from the EMP.

'Do we wipe out Russia's Black Sea fleet for that? Bomb Russian troops in Ukraine? That simply invites Putin to unleash his arsenal against US forces in Europe, at minimum. Then what do we do? The only next step for us would be general war against Russia, for which the nuclear threshold has already crossed.'

Try to think past your nose when the discussion involves nuclear weapons.

'I hate to say it, but Putin holds the cards here. No nuclear power would refuse to escalate as another one attempted to obliterate its armed forces and government.'

It's long long long past time to negotiate a settlement here.

 

By "defend our new territory" you mean go to war with Russia.

I admit, I've been puzzling over this all year and still have not gotten a satisfactory answer, but why do you (and so many others) want to start World War III?

 

Kindly explain why some of the paragraphs in your post are surrounded by single-quote marks. What precisely does that denote??

 

This is just insanity, at least to me, trying to come up with some round about way to get into a war when we have nothing at stake. It's mind boggling.

 

Sure, it's policing I suppose you might call it: the good Samaritan instinct. It's obvious to onlookers that Putin is power mad and is 'mugging' its neighbors in a straightforward bid to steal their immense wealth and claim it as Russia's own. It's what imperialists, eg Hitler, have all attempted, and the fear is that if these actions are left unchecked then there is no end to the offenders' expansionary tendencies -- no end until the entire world is bereft.

 

Hard to listen to a rant on imperialism when the key to your plan is for the US to annex Ukraine.

 

I thought I made it crystal clear that my suggested plan was to take temporary ownership of Ukraine with the full blessing of the current regime, for the limited and express purpose of defending that nation against Russian aggression; and that after said threat is dispelled the US would transfer Ukraine back to its previous rightful democratically-elected regime. I thought I made all that clear in my OP.
Yes indeed, I did make that clear.

 

Oh you did, but such a deal would be unprecedented in human history (if there's another example I'm not aware of it) and would inevitably end in World War III. So one has to balance the love of having the Ukrainian flag in your social media accounts with thermonuclear war. I realize for many on this forum, that's an easy question: Go Nuclear War!

I find myself in the minority on opposing that, oddly enough.

But...let's say your fantasy actually does happen. The US annexes Ukraine, demands Russia leave "our" territory, and when of course they won't we invade, pushing the Russians out. Why would we give up valuable territory that we bled and died for? Do we get nothing out of this war? We could at least use it to ship our illegal aliens to so they can help in the rebuilding, but more likely we would never leave, and you have to know that on some level.

Anyway there is an easier way to accomplish your goal of World War III, and it's one that many people in the US already support and the President of Ukraine supports; immediate entry of Ukraine into NATO. You'll get your smoking ruin of a planet in no zero time!

 

Many thanks for your participation, Lil Mike

 

No thanks. We don't want to own Ukraine. We just want them to fight our war for us.

Correct. But you missed that there is some perceived benefit to the U.S. in the war.

 

The entire human race benefits when imperialist war-mongering muggers - such as Russia's Putin et al - are vanquished (and made an example of).