Ukraine

[Michael in ABQ]

It seems like a lot of fighting activity and also political activity for Ukraine lately.  I'm surprised that this thread has been so slow. 


From what I've seen online Ukraine has hit Russia hard with massive drone and missile attacks.  Biden has approved fancier high-range missiles.  Congress seems a little wishy-washy about funding, but maybe that will give Putin false hope while encouraging Ukraine to hit them even harder.  I can't imagine the GOP really defunding something that the Military Industrial Complex wants.

They'll cave like they always do. Even if there's a government shut down it will be meaningless like every other time. It's all just theater so Congress can look like they're doing something.

It's interesting how in the last decade or so the Democrats have become the war party - something the Republican party has long held as a pillar that they were the party for strong national defense. Frankly sending arms to an ally to fight Russia on our behalf while placing zero US military personnel at risk seems like a no-brainer from a strategic perspective - especially when you consider that all of that materiel is built in the US and provides lots of jobs. After all the Department of Defense is the government's most effective jobs program since it employs several million people directly and indirectly - usually with relatively high wages.

[alsoknownasDean]

It's interesting how in the last decade or so the Democrats have become the war party - something the Republican party has long held as a pillar that they were the party for strong national defense. Frankly sending arms to an ally to fight Russia on our behalf while placing zero US military personnel at risk seems like a no-brainer from a strategic perspective - especially when you consider that all of that materiel is built in the US and provides lots of jobs. After all the Department of Defense is the government's most effective jobs program since it employs several million people directly and indirectly - usually with relatively high wages.

Isn't a whole bunch of the materiel sent to Ukraine older stuff that the DoD was paying to store, and saves on decommissioning costs? It's one thing for politicians to say $x in aid was sent (or complain about $x being spent) but potentially that was the original cost from years/decades ago on kit well and truly depreciated on their books.

Does anyone know when the weather in Ukraine starts to get wet and mud becomes an issue again? Surely the challenge is for Ukraine to make as much progress on the ground before the weather intervenes and Russia rebuilds their defences over the winter.

[pecunia]

It seems like a lot of fighting activity and also political activity for Ukraine lately.  I'm surprised that this thread has been so slow. 


From what I've seen online Ukraine has hit Russia hard with massive drone and missile attacks.  Biden has approved fancier high-range missiles.  Congress seems a little wishy-washy about funding, but maybe that will give Putin false hope while encouraging Ukraine to hit them even harder.  I can't imagine the GOP really defunding something that the Military Industrial Complex wants.

They'll cave like they always do. Even if there's a government shut down it will be meaningless like every other time. It's all just theater so Congress can look like they're doing something.

It's interesting how in the last decade or so the Democrats have become the war party - something the Republican party has long held as a pillar that they were the party for strong national defense. Frankly sending arms to an ally to fight Russia on our behalf while placing zero US military personnel at risk seems like a no-brainer from a strategic perspective - especially when you consider that all of that materiel is built in the US and provides lots of jobs. After all the Department of Defense is the government's most effective jobs program since it employs several million people directly and indirectly - usually with relatively high wages.

I think they are both war parties...The Military Industrial Complex is said to be deeply entrenched.

Some Republicans have become truly bizarre.  They don't want to help Ukrainians become free, but want to help dictatorial Russia.  At the same time, they wish to cut successful Social programs such as Social Security and Medicare.  All in the name of cutting taxes for rich people, I guess.

[FIPurpose]

It seems like a lot of fighting activity and also political activity for Ukraine lately.  I'm surprised that this thread has been so slow. 


From what I've seen online Ukraine has hit Russia hard with massive drone and missile attacks.  Biden has approved fancier high-range missiles.  Congress seems a little wishy-washy about funding, but maybe that will give Putin false hope while encouraging Ukraine to hit them even harder.  I can't imagine the GOP really defunding something that the Military Industrial Complex wants.

They'll cave like they always do. Even if there's a government shut down it will be meaningless like every other time. It's all just theater so Congress can look like they're doing something.

It's interesting how in the last decade or so the Democrats have become the war party - something the Republican party has long held as a pillar that they were the party for strong national defense. Frankly sending arms to an ally to fight Russia on our behalf while placing zero US military personnel at risk seems like a no-brainer from a strategic perspective - especially when you consider that all of that materiel is built in the US and provides lots of jobs. After all the Department of Defense is the government's most effective jobs program since it employs several million people directly and indirectly - usually with relatively high wages.

I think they are both war parties...The Military Industrial Complex is said to be deeply entrenched.

Some Republicans have become truly bizarre.  They don't want to help Ukrainians become free, but want to help dictatorial Russia.  At the same time, they wish to cut successful Social programs such as Social Security and Medicare.  All in the name of cutting taxes for rich people, I guess.

I think finding a coherent message in the GOP's platform is a Sisyphean task.

The GOP's strategy is to do whatever short-term thinking its billionaire donor class is asking it to do. It's not a way of building a unified political theory, it's simply what can I say and do today that gets me more power tomorrow.

Of course cutting taxes at the top end is always up there, but it doesn't necessarily explain all spending decisions. Russia is a huge gold mine for many American oligarchs. The original Koch himself got his start building oil refineries for the Russians and Nazis 80 years ago. There are lots of big GOP names that want to see a Russia take over of Ukraine in order to get their piece of the spoils.

[pecunia]

It seems like a lot of fighting activity and also political activity for Ukraine lately.  I'm surprised that this thread has been so slow. 


From what I've seen online Ukraine has hit Russia hard with massive drone and missile attacks.  Biden has approved fancier high-range missiles.  Congress seems a little wishy-washy about funding, but maybe that will give Putin false hope while encouraging Ukraine to hit them even harder.  I can't imagine the GOP really defunding something that the Military Industrial Complex wants.

They'll cave like they always do. Even if there's a government shut down it will be meaningless like every other time. It's all just theater so Congress can look like they're doing something.

It's interesting how in the last decade or so the Democrats have become the war party - something the Republican party has long held as a pillar that they were the party for strong national defense. Frankly sending arms to an ally to fight Russia on our behalf while placing zero US military personnel at risk seems like a no-brainer from a strategic perspective - especially when you consider that all of that materiel is built in the US and provides lots of jobs. After all the Department of Defense is the government's most effective jobs program since it employs several million people directly and indirectly - usually with relatively high wages.

I think they are both war parties...The Military Industrial Complex is said to be deeply entrenched.

Some Republicans have become truly bizarre.  They don't want to help Ukrainians become free, but want to help dictatorial Russia.  At the same time, they wish to cut successful Social programs such as Social Security and Medicare.  All in the name of cutting taxes for rich people, I guess.

I think finding a coherent message in the GOP's platform is a Sisyphean task.

The GOP's strategy is to do whatever short-term thinking its billionaire donor class is asking it to do. It's not a way of building a unified political theory, it's simply what can I say and do today that gets me more power tomorrow.

Of course cutting taxes at the top end is always up there, but it doesn't necessarily explain all spending decisions. Russia is a huge gold mine for many American oligarchs. The original Koch himself got his start building oil refineries for the Russians and Nazis 80 years ago. There are lots of big GOP names that want to see a Russia take over of Ukraine in order to get their piece of the spoils.

Now that made sense.  Russia is basically run by pirates.  American pirates can understand the actions of the Russian pirates where their thinking is a mystery to the rest of us.  I sure can't figure why Putin would send over 250,000 of his countrymen to their deaths for land Russia didn't need.  Now a Pirate Captain might be willing to sacrifice a good part of his crew as the booty would be divided amongst fewer men.

[TomTX]

Isn't a whole bunch of the materiel sent to Ukraine older stuff that the DoD was paying to store, and saves on decommissioning costs? It's one thing for politicians to say $x in aid was sent (or complain about $x being spent) but potentially that was the original cost from years/decades ago on kit well and truly depreciated on their books.

Yes, the USA has literally millions of cluster munitions stockpiled (biggest category being ~3M 155mm artillery shells) which have a net negative value - we're never going to use them, and we are paying to store and paying to dispose of them (slowly). Shipping them to Ukraine will literally reduce US military costs. Same with a bunch of other stuff - we're not sending the current version Bradley, we're sending old ones we were never going to upgrade, but were still being maintained. We have thousands of old-version Abrams. If the ATACMs being sent is the cluster version - I believe all of those are past expiration date as well (M39 definitely, might be a few M39A1 not yet expired) though there has been a program to convert a small percentage of them to the M57E1 edition with unitary warhead.

Once the next generation missile (PrSM) is rolled out in sufficient quantity, all the ATACAMs are outdated and headed for disposal. PrSM has much longer range*, better seekers (even before the 2025 seeker update known as Increment 2) and you can fit two in a HIMARS pod instead of one ATACMS. PrSM is currently in early low-volume production of Increment 1. I believe it's officially deployed to the US Army, just not many yet.

*499km, but that's likely a software limit which will be lifted since the US and Russia dissolved that particular ballistic missile treaty. Increment 4 is supposed to exceed 1,000km with a new propulsion system upgrade. Edit: Found a reputable source, Increment 1 now has an official range of 650km.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermediate-Range_Nuclear_Forces_Treaty
https://breakingdefense.com/2023/03/army-taps-teams-to-build-new-precision-strike-missile-for-targets-beyond-1000-km/

[Just Joe]

Plus it gives the Pentagon an excuse to ask new military gear to replace what was sent to Ukraine. The factories must be thrilled.

[pecunia]

Plus it gives the Pentagon an excuse to ask new military gear to replace what was sent to Ukraine. The factories must be thrilled.

A lot of research that passes to non military applications has been done by the military.  Other than NASA where else does the government support applied science in such a manner?  It's kind of a morbid thing, but what other human endeavor but war has produced such innovation?  Even this internet thing I'm sending this silly message into is an example of such applied science.

[Travis]

It's interesting how in the last decade or so the Democrats have become the war party - something the Republican party has long held as a pillar that they were the party for strong national defense. Frankly sending arms to an ally to fight Russia on our behalf while placing zero US military personnel at risk seems like a no-brainer from a strategic perspective - especially when you consider that all of that materiel is built in the US and provides lots of jobs. After all the Department of Defense is the government's most effective jobs program since it employs several million people directly and indirectly - usually with relatively high wages.

Isn't a whole bunch of the materiel sent to Ukraine older stuff that the DoD was paying to store, and saves on decommissioning costs? It's one thing for politicians to say $x in aid was sent (or complain about $x being spent) but potentially that was the original cost from years/decades ago on kit well and truly depreciated on their books.

Does anyone know when the weather in Ukraine starts to get wet and mud becomes an issue again? Surely the challenge is for Ukraine to make as much progress on the ground before the weather intervenes and Russia rebuilds their defences over the winter.

The anti-Ukraine side of the GOP has convinced many of their constituents that we've shipped countless billions in cash to Ukraine. We've given very little actual money to Ukraine, with most of it as credits to spend on US weapons contracts. Europe is doing most of the direct funding. Just like with the "oh my god, the DoD lost $6 billion in Ukraine," it was an accounting error because we're applying a value to equipment sent over which can be subjective. We didn't actually lose anything.

The rains will start in 2-3 weeks and get really heavy in November. I'm told that southern Zap province where the fighting is heaviest should not be affected as much by the mud as it has in other areas of the country. If it does, Ukraine has shown they are adept at light infantry fighting which shouldn't be affected quite as badly by the rain compared to heavy vehicles.

[Michael in ABQ]

It's interesting how in the last decade or so the Democrats have become the war party - something the Republican party has long held as a pillar that they were the party for strong national defense. Frankly sending arms to an ally to fight Russia on our behalf while placing zero US military personnel at risk seems like a no-brainer from a strategic perspective - especially when you consider that all of that materiel is built in the US and provides lots of jobs. After all the Department of Defense is the government's most effective jobs program since it employs several million people directly and indirectly - usually with relatively high wages.

Isn't a whole bunch of the materiel sent to Ukraine older stuff that the DoD was paying to store, and saves on decommissioning costs? It's one thing for politicians to say $x in aid was sent (or complain about $x being spent) but potentially that was the original cost from years/decades ago on kit well and truly depreciated on their books.

Does anyone know when the weather in Ukraine starts to get wet and mud becomes an issue again? Surely the challenge is for Ukraine to make as much progress on the ground before the weather intervenes and Russia rebuilds their defences over the winter.

The anti-Ukraine side of the GOP has convinced many of their constituents that we've shipped countless billions in cash to Ukraine. We've given very little actual money to Ukraine, with most of it as credits to spend on US weapons contracts. Europe is doing most of the direct funding. Just like with the "oh my god, the DoD lost $6 billion in Ukraine," it was an accounting error because we're applying a value to equipment sent over which can be subjective. We didn't actually lose anything.

Yes, basically this.

Government accounting is not like a business where there is a real cost to buy equipment/material and there is usually a market value that can be calculated based on depreciation, resale, or salvage (or a negative value for disposal in some cases). 

What is the value of a tank when literally the only buyer is the Department of Defense? Even if the manufacturer is given permission to export it, the actual value gets very squishy. I helped deliver tens of millions of dollars worth of equipment to an allied military. That country paid $0. Some of it was brand new and straight from the factory, other stuff was clearly pulled from old supplies and basically had zero value (i.e. old uniforms that were phased out 20 years ago). How much did it really cost the US taxpayer for all of that? Good luck trying to figure it out.

A lot of times when there is an announcement that some country sold arms to another country, there's a bunch of requirements that some of that money is spent on assembling or maintaining those arms in the country that is buying them. Or the US gives money to an ally - but with the condition that it can only be used to buy weapons from the US. So did we really give them a billion dollars, or was it a billion dollar gift card that can only be spent at Lockheed-Martin, General Dynamics, Boeing, etc.

[TomTX]

Plus it gives the Pentagon an excuse to ask new military gear to replace what was sent to Ukraine. The factories must be thrilled.

Oh, absolutely. Next-generation Abrams upgrade got fast tracked so fast that they cancelled the current upgrade. Just going to a standard, modular communications architecture (like CANbus in cars or the Abrams X demonstrator) will save over a ton of weight.

PrSM range increase I noted above is fast tracked for 2027... I'm sure there's plenty more.

There are massive increases in shell production already being ramped.

https://www.defensenews.com/land/2023/09/06/us-army-scraps-abrams-tank-upgrade-unveils-new-modernization-plan/

[Just Joe]

Plus it gives the Pentagon an excuse to ask new military gear to replace what was sent to Ukraine. The factories must be thrilled.

A lot of research that passes to non military applications has been done by the military.  Other than NASA where else does the government support applied science in such a manner?  It's kind of a morbid thing, but what other human endeavor but war has produced such innovation?  Even this internet thing I'm sending this silly message into is an example of such applied science.

Completely agree. Every war or prep for war yields amazing technological advances. Yes, kind of morbid.

[LennStar]

Good News!

Ukrainian forces have broken through the last fortification line near Werbowe. It's unclear how much forces and how wide and if they can even hold their position - but it's an important first.

Judging by the fact that Russia is throwing all reserves into the fight, including a newly formed unit that was supposed to still train for several months, this might be the decisive point of the offensive.

From what I can stitch together (and remember, fog of war, propaganda etc.) the Russian troops seem now to be at the breaking point and we might see some (relativly speaking) far and fast gains of the Ukrainians starting in a week or so (just barely in time before the mud season). I do believe they still have the manpower to do it - and certainly the moral superiority.

[pecunia]

Good News!

Ukrainian forces have broken through the last fortification line near Werbowe. It's unclear how much forces and how wide and if they can even hold their position - but it's an important first.

Judging by the fact that Russia is throwing all reserves into the fight, including a newly formed unit that was supposed to still train for several months, this might be the decisive point of the offensive.

From what I can stitch together (and remember, fog of war, propaganda etc.) the Russian troops seem now to be at the breaking point and we might see some (relativly speaking) far and fast gains of the Ukrainians starting in a week or so (just barely in time before the mud season). I do believe they still have the manpower to do it - and certainly the moral superiority.

I guess I don't understand this mud season thing.  Here's what the internet says:

In Russia and Ukraine, there's a season known as “rasputitsa.” Twice a year, when the snow melts in the spring and when drenching rains pour in the fall, the soil turns into thick mud — making it difficult to move cargo and heavy machinery cross-country.

Do the roads have no gravel?  Are they all unpaved?  Is the land like a gumbo where tie soil sticks to everything?  Is there immense rain like a monsoon?  Since Ukraine is an agricultural powerhouse, I would assume the soil is clay and not rocky sand.

[zolotiyeruki]

The paved roads will be fine, and the gravel roads will probably still be usable, but if you're trying to attack and can only follow roads, it makes the defenders' job a whole lot easier.  And the fields simply become a quagmire for anything driving through them.

That said, I've heard it stated several times that rasputitsa affects the south/southeast regions of Ukraine (where the current counteroffensive is concentrated) far less than it affects the north and northeast areas.  If so, it's conceivable that Ukraine will be able to continue their counteroffensive through the fall.

[Travis]

Good News!

Ukrainian forces have broken through the last fortification line near Werbowe. It's unclear how much forces and how wide and if they can even hold their position - but it's an important first.

Judging by the fact that Russia is throwing all reserves into the fight, including a newly formed unit that was supposed to still train for several months, this might be the decisive point of the offensive.

From what I can stitch together (and remember, fog of war, propaganda etc.) the Russian troops seem now to be at the breaking point and we might see some (relativly speaking) far and fast gains of the Ukrainians starting in a week or so (just barely in time before the mud season). I do believe they still have the manpower to do it - and certainly the moral superiority.

I guess I don't understand this mud season thing.  Here's what the internet says:

In Russia and Ukraine, there's a season known as “rasputitsa.” Twice a year, when the snow melts in the spring and when drenching rains pour in the fall, the soil turns into thick mud — making it difficult to move cargo and heavy machinery cross-country.

Do the roads have no gravel?  Are they all unpaved?  Is the land like a gumbo where tie soil sticks to everything?  Is there immense rain like a monsoon?  Since Ukraine is an agricultural powerhouse, I would assume the soil is clay and not rocky sand.

You try to stay off the roads if you're in range of enemy weapons since you present an easier target. The soil in Ukraine runs very deep and retains water so there are part of the country where tanks and wheeled vehicles will dig themselves 2-3 feet into mud. Below are a couple examples of what the conditions can look like, but I couldn't find any mud photos of where they're fighting now.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/02/10/russia-is-about-to-face-ukraines-infamous-mud-again.html mud in Izyum last fall when Russia retreated from that region.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/21/how-ukraines-mud-became-a-secret-weapon-in-its-defense-against-russia.html mud near Kyiv in the spring

[Telecaster]

Donald Trump is also a valuable Russian asset - he was recruited over forty years ago:

That guy is selling a book.   Could be true, but a book saying Trump wasn't an asset would sell much either.  So I'm not sure if I believe that source by itself.   

But we can apply Occam's razor.   Trump has been blackmailed at least twice that we know of, once by Stormy Daniels and once by Karen McDougal.  So we know he's vunerable to blackmail, at least.  Prior to Trump's inagulation, Obama specifically warned Trump about Flynn's contacts with Russia, yet Trump appointed him as National Security Advisor anyway.    Early in Trump's term, acting attorney general Sally Yates warned Trump in a memo that Flynn had been untruthful in reporting his contacts with Russia, and was a security risk.    Trump did not act on that information until the memo was leaked by a member of his staff.

Why would you appoint a guy who was deeply suspected to be a national security risk to that postion?   There are probably hundreds if not thousands of people qualified for that job.   Find somebody who is like Ceaser's wife, beyond any suspicion.   

Next, shortly before Trump's meeting with Putin in Helsinki, US intellegence agencies--especially the director of National Intelligence Dan Coats--reported that Russia had interferred in the 2016 elections, mostly by attacking Clinton and the Democrats.   On top of that, the justice Department had just indicted 12 Russians on charges they had conducted the interferance options.   So at the Helsinki Q&A naturally there are questions about the election interference.  Trump says that he doesn't think it happened, and specifically mentions Dan Coats as a person he respects, but doesn't believe him in this case because Trump belives Putin in more credible.   Next question is about the 12 Russians.   Obviously, the US wants to arrest them or at least interrogate them at a minimum.   Equally obviously, Russia probably isn't going to go for that, potentially heading for a diplomatic impass.     Trump however, says that he has cut an amazing, incredible deal with Putin.  Best deal ever.  Putin is incredibly, incredibly generous to even offer such an amazing deal.  The deal is Russia will interrogate the 12 Russians for us, and then report back what they found.   If that weren't astonishing enough, Trump went onto blame the United States for the deterioration in US-Russia relations. 

I have never before seen, and could not have imagined an American president groveling, capitulating, and humiliating himself before a foreign leader like that.   I don't know how else you would explain Trump demeaning himself to Putin unless Trump was compromised.   And of course, Trump's first impeachment was about his subverting the national security interests of the United States by trying to use aid to Ukraine as a political tool.   Then there is his contempt of NATO and a host of other, similar issues.

So, I haven't seen any compelling evidence Trump was compromised.  But he seems to act like he's been compromised. 

[PeteD01]

Donald Trump is also a valuable Russian asset - he was recruited over forty years ago:

That guy is selling a book.   Could be true, but a book saying Trump wasn't an asset would sell much either.  So I'm not sure if I believe that source by itself.   

...

The KGB recruited many potential assets in a scattershot approach and cultivated them over time on the odd chance that they might move into whatever position they thought might give them an opportunity to exploit.

Most of those targeted probably were duds, as expected.

The very nature of this type of long term operation pretty much excludes finding a continuous trail of evidence - the lack of evidence is not due to clever concealment but the point of that sort of operation (typically a deep cover mole thing).

The circumstantial evidence you are presenting is all that would ever surface in cases like Trump's - and it is devastating.

[Radagast]

Does anyone doubt that the brutal Hamas attack against Israel was coordinated with and by Russia? It turns much of the world against Ukraine's backers, and distracts Ukraine's backers attention and resources. It is vital that policy makers do not lose track of the main culprit, and must redouble their efforts to support Ukraine. The Biden administration has shown itself to be fearful and incapable through its weak support to Ukraine. Not a good sign for its future.

I have been disappointed in US leaders. Please write to your congress people, telling them to grow up and get their priorities straight.

[zolotiyeruki]

It turns much of the world against Ukraine's backers,

What do you mean by this?  Are you saying that Hamas' attack on Israel will turn much of the world against the US and western Europe?

My impression is that Israel is capable of taking care of itself.

[LennStar]

Militarily speaking Israel can easily stomp Hamas. It's one of the most militarized countrys on earth. It wont lose to a few pickups with MG guys on them.

I am way more concerned about Ukraine. Looks like they could not push through as I hoped. :(

[jinga nation]

Does anyone doubt that the brutal Hamas attack against Israel was coordinated with and by Russia? It turns much of the world against Ukraine's backers, and distracts Ukraine's backers attention and resources. It is vital that policy makers do not lose track of the main culprit, and must redouble their efforts to support Ukraine. The Biden administration has shown itself to be fearful and incapable through its weak support to Ukraine. Not a good sign for its future.

I have been disappointed in US leaders. Please write to your congress people, telling them to grow up and get their priorities straight.

Nope, I'm sure it has to do with Israel and Saudi Arabia normalizing ties. Read this: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/9/21/whats-happening-with-normalising-ties-between-saudi-arabia-and-israel

Hamas is supported by Hezbollah, who are backed by Iran. This is Iran starting a proxy war because 1. they hate Israel, and 2. they hate the Saudis, because of the Shia-Sunni divide.

As for the 46th administration being "weak", realize that old munitions from the American arsenal is kicking Russia's rear. And don't go fucking blaming the current admin when you've got Russian sympathizers in the GOP and Republicans not wanting to vote for democracy. There's a limit to what Biden can do without full congressional support. And remember, US cannot physically enter the war theatre there, nor can any NATO partner country. They can only support by supplying materiel and intel.

FTFY:
I have been disappointed in US leaders Republicans. Please write to your GOP congress people, telling them to grow up a pair and get their priorities straight.

[Just Joe]

Came here to say something very similar Jinga. Not as eloquently as you I'm sure. The GOP needs to get their shit together today and support democracy for everyone. Quite fetishizing the rich and the dictators. Stand up for "the people" and democracy that they so often mention in their speeches. 

I have no major problems with the Democrats or Biden except they probably should have called out the GOP every time they acted like the dumbasses they have been lately.

So now we have two very serious conflicts overseas, and maybe a couple more possibly brewing - Serbia/Kosovo and Azerbaijan/Armenia. Possibly inflamed by Russia and Iran.

Time to push Trump/MTG/Boebert/Santo aside and get some work done.

Time to get out the military gear, polish it up, catch up on the maintenance, and do some closed door planning.

[GuitarStv]

Does anyone doubt that the brutal Hamas attack against Israel was coordinated with and by Russia? It turns much of the world against Ukraine's backers, and distracts Ukraine's backers attention and resources. It is vital that policy makers do not lose track of the main culprit, and must redouble their efforts to support Ukraine. The Biden administration has shown itself to be fearful and incapable through its weak support to Ukraine. Not a good sign for its future.

I have been disappointed in US leaders. Please write to your congress people, telling them to grow up and get their priorities straight.

Nope, I'm sure it has to do with Israel and Saudi Arabia normalizing ties. Read this: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/9/21/whats-happening-with-normalising-ties-between-saudi-arabia-and-israel

Hamas is supported by Hezbollah, who are backed by Iran. This is Iran starting a proxy war because 1. they hate Israel, and 2. they hate the Saudis, because of the Shia-Sunni divide.

As for the 46th administration being "weak", realize that old munitions from the American arsenal is kicking Russia's rear. And don't go fucking blaming the current admin when you've got Russian sympathizers in the GOP and Republicans not wanting to vote for democracy. There's a limit to what Biden can do without full congressional support. And remember, US cannot physically enter the war theatre there, nor can any NATO partner country. They can only support by supplying materiel and intel.

FTFY:
I have been disappointed in US leaders Republicans. Please write to your GOP congress people, telling them to grow up a pair and get their priorities straight.

I don't think Russia has anything to do with it either.  In fact, it wouldn't surprise me at all if Netenyahu wanted and helped to set up this situation in Israel.  It unifies the country against a common enemy that his hard right allies in government hate, takes the focus off of his own corruption and attempts to wrest power away from the Israeli Supreme Court (so he could avoid those pesky checks and balances), follows months of increasing Israeli heavyhandedness in their ongoing occupation of Palestine and is coming from an enemy that is so badly outclassed by spending, training, and technology that they pose no military risk to Israel.  Certainly seems like a fortunate turn for the leader of Israel.

[sonofsven]

Is it just a coincidence that Trump was blabbing about our plans to attack Iran, and know Iran-backed Hamas attacks Israel?
And who has Iran been partnering with in Ukraine? That's right, "Russia, Russia, Russia"

[Michael in ABQ]

Does anyone doubt that the brutal Hamas attack against Israel was coordinated with and by Russia? It turns much of the world against Ukraine's backers, and distracts Ukraine's backers attention and resources. It is vital that policy makers do not lose track of the main culprit, and must redouble their efforts to support Ukraine. The Biden administration has shown itself to be fearful and incapable through its weak support to Ukraine. Not a good sign for its future.

I have been disappointed in US leaders. Please write to your congress people, telling them to grow up and get their priorities straight.

Nope, I'm sure it has to do with Israel and Saudi Arabia normalizing ties. Read this: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/9/21/whats-happening-with-normalising-ties-between-saudi-arabia-and-israel

Hamas is supported by Hezbollah, who are backed by Iran. This is Iran starting a proxy war because 1. they hate Israel, and 2. they hate the Saudis, because of the Shia-Sunni divide.

As for the 46th administration being "weak", realize that old munitions from the American arsenal is kicking Russia's rear. And don't go fucking blaming the current admin when you've got Russian sympathizers in the GOP and Republicans not wanting to vote for democracy. There's a limit to what Biden can do without full congressional support. And remember, US cannot physically enter the war theatre there, nor can any NATO partner country. They can only support by supplying materiel and intel.

FTFY:
I have been disappointed in US leaders Republicans. Please write to your GOP congress people, telling them to grow up a pair and get their priorities straight.

I don't think Russia has anything to do with it either.  In fact, it wouldn't surprise me at all if Netenyahu wanted and helped to set up this situation in Israel.  It unifies the country against a common enemy that his hard right allies in government hate, takes the focus off of his own corruption and attempts to wrest power away from the Israeli Supreme Court (so he could avoid those pesky checks and balances), follows months of increasing Israeli heavyhandedness in their ongoing occupation of Palestine and is coming from an enemy that is so badly outclassed by spending, training, and technology that they pose no military risk to Israel.  Certainly seems like a fortunate turn for the leader of Israel.

Certainly looks like they still pose a military risk. Maybe not an existential one that they can conquer Israel but they can certainly inflict pain. It's pretty far fetched to think that the Prime Minister was able to set up Hamas to launch a massive attack that killed hundreds. That's like saying Bush somehow caused 9/11 so the US could steal oil from Iraq.

Much more likely is that Iran pushed Hamas to launch this attack to derail the rapprochement between Israel and the Arab world, especially Saudi Arabia.

[Radagast]

It turns much of the world against Ukraine's backers,

What do you mean by this?  Are you saying that Hamas' attack on Israel will turn much of the world against the US and western Europe?

My impression is that Israel is capable of taking care of itself.

Turn against, and make life more difficult for. Tensions in the region will likely increase gas prices, which benefits Russia and detriments Europe. Russia claims overlordship of all Slavic, Turkic, Mongol, and Eastern Christian peoples. Beyond Russia and Ukraine, the next ring of influence includes those groups. Russia recently made a significant gain by influencing Slovakia. They lost significantly when Armenia, one of the few non-Russian eastern Christian groups, declared for the West. Turkic groups have been heavily oppressed by Russia, and yet often identify as opponents of Israel because of their religion. This group is of great import, and Ukraine recently appointed a Crimean Tatar (Turkic/Islamic) as defense minister. You may also recall a year ago a video of two foreign fighters in Ukraine "we, a Muslim and Jew, are working against Russia because they are so bad" or something similar. Russia seeks to inflame tensions in Israel/Palestine under the theory "the enemy of my enemy is my friend". The backers of Israel are very similar to but not identical to the backers of Ukraine. Russia seeks to cut off the difference, and gain supporters.

Agreed, and yet preliminarily (we'll see what Monday brings), I see an $8B package of advanced weapons suggested for Israel which is well capable of taking care of itself, while that same support and weapons are currently denied Ukraine under a series of spurious excuses even though strategic  and moral clarity are overwhelmingly on the side of providing those to Ukraine.

[Radagast]

Does anyone doubt that the brutal Hamas attack against Israel was coordinated with and by Russia? It turns much of the world against Ukraine's backers, and distracts Ukraine's backers attention and resources. It is vital that policy makers do not lose track of the main culprit, and must redouble their efforts to support Ukraine. The Biden administration has shown itself to be fearful and incapable through its weak support to Ukraine. Not a good sign for its future.

I have been disappointed in US leaders. Please write to your congress people, telling them to grow up and get their priorities straight.

Nope, I'm sure it has to do with Israel and Saudi Arabia normalizing ties. Read this: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/9/21/whats-happening-with-normalising-ties-between-saudi-arabia-and-israel

Hamas is supported by Hezbollah, who are backed by Iran. This is Iran starting a proxy war because 1. they hate Israel, and 2. they hate the Saudis, because of the Shia-Sunni divide.

As for the 46th administration being "weak", realize that old munitions from the American arsenal is kicking Russia's rear. And don't go fucking blaming the current admin when you've got Russian sympathizers in the GOP and Republicans not wanting to vote for democracy. There's a limit to what Biden can do without full congressional support. And remember, US cannot physically enter the war theatre there, nor can any NATO partner country. They can only support by supplying materiel and intel.

FTFY:
I have been disappointed in US leaders Republicans. Please write to your GOP congress people, telling them to grow up a pair and get their priorities straight.

Iran gave Russia Shaheds, its most effective tool in attacking Ukrainian electrical and grain facilities and possibly others. If you think Iran got nothing besides a future promise of SU-35s which wouldn't last a week against either the US or Israel (let alone both), you're a fool.

The Republicans have a huge problem in that a significant number of their people betrayed the US Constitution, openly kiss ass to Putin, Xi, Kim, Orban, and anti-American dictators everywhere. McCarthy recently sided with Putin's cocksuckers over 80% of the US populace and his loss is well deserved.

And yet here I am blaming Biden. His administration and Biden personally have been delaying and defang-ing assistance to Ukraine far beyond the bounds of what Congress has set. Biden is the Commander In Chief and is personally and directly responsible. The US has failed to provide any jets or munitions with a range beyond 75km or so at Biden's personal instruction, in addition I am sure to others. This has been directly responsible for the slow and unnecessarily costly Ukrainian advance. Sending 31 tanks 19 months later to a nation fighting the entire Russian army is a giant "fuck you" to Ukraine and the cause of freedom and the buck stops at Biden, unless there is a grand strategy that materializes in the next 10 months (I am perfectly willing to accept this by the way). Biden will be the first place I look when I look to place potential blame if Ukraine is not victorious by the next election (Putin cocksuckers Trump, DeSantis, and Loserhead need not apply). You are free to attempt to change the Biden administration's policy to change my mind :) I judge solely by results, so I am easily persuadable.

Don't be lazy. Write your Democratic congress critters too. If Biden fails it will reflect on them. People like me have a track record of looking for results, not teams. You can ask Clinton II, Trump, Heller, Laxalt, and Sisolak if you want a resume.

[Radagast]

Came here to say something very similar Jinga. Not as eloquently as you I'm sure. The GOP needs to get their shit together today and support democracy for everyone. Quite fetishizing the rich and the dictators. Stand up for "the people" and democracy that they so often mention in their speeches. 

I have no major problems with the Democrats or Biden except they probably should have called out the GOP every time they acted like the dumbasses they have been lately.

So now we have two very serious conflicts overseas, and maybe a couple more possibly brewing - Serbia/Kosovo and Azerbaijan/Armenia. Possibly inflamed by Russia and Iran.

Time to push Trump/MTG/Boebert/Santo aside and get some work done.

Time to get out the military gear, polish it up, catch up on the maintenance, and do some closed door planning.

Basically, yes.

[Radagast]

I don't think Russia has anything to do with it either.  In fact, it wouldn't surprise me at all if Netenyahu wanted and helped to set up this situation in Israel.  It unifies the country against a common enemy that his hard right allies in government hate, takes the focus off of his own corruption and attempts to wrest power away from the Israeli Supreme Court (so he could avoid those pesky checks and balances), follows months of increasing Israeli heavyhandedness in their ongoing occupation of Palestine and is coming from an enemy that is so badly outclassed by spending, training, and technology that they pose no military risk to Israel.  Certainly seems like a fortunate turn for the leader of Israel.

Iran gave Russia Shaheds, its most effective tool in attacking Ukrainian electrical and grain facilities and possibly others. If you think Iran got nothing besides a future promise of SU-35s which wouldn't last a week against either the US or Israel (let alone both), you're a fool.

[LennStar]

Sending 31 tanks 19 months later to a nation fighting the entire Russian army is a giant "fuck you" to Ukraine and the cause of freedom and the buck stops at Biden, unless there is a grand strategy that materializes in the next 10 months (I am perfectly willing to accept this by the way).

The strategy is to send just enough material that Russia cannot win. And of course Ukraine also not (at least not in any short amount of time), because that would deplete Russia less and might make Putin do something terrible somewhere else too.

Why do you think every politician always said "Russia cannot be allowed to win", but nobody said "Ukraine must win"?

[Dancin'Dog]

The Biden agenda seems to prefer Putin to remain engaged as long as possible.  Why use your queen & aces when you still have plenty of pawns to keep Putin's mistake in the world spotlight?  What hurry is there for the West?  Putin's struggles & failures are a clear & present reminder to those who might doubt the US & NATO's power.  Our alliances are stronger than ever, and we have only used minimal weapons.  Time allows Democratic nations to prepare & fortify their defenses.  Time is on Biden's side.  Putin plays the slow game & Biden seems to play it just as well.  Ukraine is the unfortunate stage of this drama. 


What urgency is there for Biden? 

[LaineyAZ]

I just find it disheartening that our news media, especially CNN, seems to only be able to report on one global issue at a time.

For months on CNN it was Ukraine-All-The-Time, then switched to U.S. House Speaker-All-The-Time, and now it's the Hamas attack on Israel-All-The-Time. 

It's no wonder Americans don't have a broader understanding of the world because there doesn't seem to be any patience to learn the history or background of anything beyond what the latest video footage is showing.

[jinga nation]

¿por que no los dos tres?

Theory 1, which some said was Russia, is possible. Trump leaked Israel's Iron Dome details to the Russians, who supplied the info to Iran, who passed it to Hezbollah, in turn shared with Hamas.

Theory 2 is Theory 1 without the Russian involvement.

Theory 3: This was cooked up by Netanyahu as mentioned. Because for all intents and purposes, having a massive 24/7/365 national security and intel operation caught napping is very suspicious. Also, Bibi plays friendly with Putin.

@Radagast Actually, my blame partially goes to Obama, who didn't do much during his time when Crimea was invaded by Russians in 2014 and he tried to play "both sides".
Also, blame is on US, and UK, who with Russia, had promised to give Ukraine security in exchange for giving up its nukes under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum. That just let the wolf into the hen house.
All these past US actions ended up emboldening Russia.

[GuitarStv]

Does anyone doubt that the brutal Hamas attack against Israel was coordinated with and by Russia? It turns much of the world against Ukraine's backers, and distracts Ukraine's backers attention and resources. It is vital that policy makers do not lose track of the main culprit, and must redouble their efforts to support Ukraine. The Biden administration has shown itself to be fearful and incapable through its weak support to Ukraine. Not a good sign for its future.

I have been disappointed in US leaders. Please write to your congress people, telling them to grow up and get their priorities straight.

Nope, I'm sure it has to do with Israel and Saudi Arabia normalizing ties. Read this: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/9/21/whats-happening-with-normalising-ties-between-saudi-arabia-and-israel

Hamas is supported by Hezbollah, who are backed by Iran. This is Iran starting a proxy war because 1. they hate Israel, and 2. they hate the Saudis, because of the Shia-Sunni divide.

As for the 46th administration being "weak", realize that old munitions from the American arsenal is kicking Russia's rear. And don't go fucking blaming the current admin when you've got Russian sympathizers in the GOP and Republicans not wanting to vote for democracy. There's a limit to what Biden can do without full congressional support. And remember, US cannot physically enter the war theatre there, nor can any NATO partner country. They can only support by supplying materiel and intel.

FTFY:
I have been disappointed in US leaders Republicans. Please write to your GOP congress people, telling them to grow up a pair and get their priorities straight.

I don't think Russia has anything to do with it either.  In fact, it wouldn't surprise me at all if Netenyahu wanted and helped to set up this situation in Israel.  It unifies the country against a common enemy that his hard right allies in government hate, takes the focus off of his own corruption and attempts to wrest power away from the Israeli Supreme Court (so he could avoid those pesky checks and balances), follows months of increasing Israeli heavyhandedness in their ongoing occupation of Palestine and is coming from an enemy that is so badly outclassed by spending, training, and technology that they pose no military risk to Israel.  Certainly seems like a fortunate turn for the leader of Israel.

Certainly looks like they still pose a military risk. Maybe not an existential one that they can conquer Israel but they can certainly inflict pain. It's pretty far fetched to think that the Prime Minister was able to set up Hamas to launch a massive attack that killed hundreds. That's like saying Bush somehow caused 9/11 so the US could steal oil from Iraq.

Much more likely is that Iran pushed Hamas to launch this attack to derail the rapprochement between Israel and the Arab world, especially Saudi Arabia.

No, that's not what I mean.  I don't believe Netanyahu helped organize the attack itself or had any contact with the Palestinian soldiers.  I suspect that he very purposely oversaw the escalations in Israel's apartheid against Palestine that pushed this outcome to be inevitable.  To keep power he is in bed with extreme right-wing Jewish extremists who have clearly made their intentions to seize all of Palestinian land for Jewish development.  He was also in charge of military deployment and actions, and personally desperately needed a distraction from the political problems his corruption and power grabbing caused.  Motive, means, and opportunity.

If it wasn't orchestrated by him, Netanyahu certainly must be counting himself lucky that it happened when it did.

[ChpBstrd]

Biden is hedging, instead of going all-in, because he's a smart politician.

First, Ukraine could still lose. Russia has a bigger population, more internal weapons production capability, China as an ally and weapons supplier, significant oil income, mind control over its people via a totalitarian grip on the media and internet, and nuclear weapons. Also, Putin is correct that we in the West with our goldfish-level attention spans are losing interest. If Ukraine loses, we'll see a genocide on the scale that last occurred in WW2. Putin could win the war in a matter of weeks if he was willing to hit Ukraine's cities with nuclear weapons. In any Ukrainian loss scenario, a Biden who went all-in would have lost the war for the Ukrainians - an incompetent commander in chief, but a Biden who did what he reasonably could while keeping his distance might be just as shocked as the rest of us, and we could relate to that. Yes, it is ridiculous people think this way, but have you been watching US politics long?

Second, a Biden who aggressively supports Ukraine leaves the Republicans in a position where they can only oppose the president's agenda. A more moderate approach is thought to maintain bipartisan support, and also theoretically give some Republicans an opening to take the opposite position and critique Biden for not doing enough. So far, only a handful of Republicans have taken strong anti-Ukraine stances, and they are the ones trying to tie Hunter Biden, who is not president, to a scandal from the Victor Yanukovyich days. This outcome can be seen as the most positive of all possible outcomes for Ukraine, though it may not last. When Trump is nominated, Vlad may call in a favor, and the very next day the entire Republican party will be against supporting Ukraine.

Third, Biden has negotiating leverage over Putin only to the extent and for only as long as he is not going all-in. Behind the scenes, diplomats are trying to make deals and NATO's only remaining leverage is the threat of sending the next package of tanks, missiles, or aircraft. The slow escalation in support... HIMARS, Abrams, ATACM, F-16s... can be seen as outcomes of a series of diplomatic discussions that did not yield NATO's preferred goals. The time to escalation can be seen as a tradeoff between giving diplomacy a chance and not letting the Russians stall the discussions for too long. Also consider... something has held Putin back from using nuclear weapons so far. I suspect there are diplomatic chess pieces in place preventing that move - for now.

Fourth, as Biden commits military resources to Ukraine, he has to watch his back in the Pacific. A Chinese attack on Taiwan or the Philippines might be provoked if China decides the US is over-committed in Europe. Particularly, the US would need as many missiles, drones, and aircraft as it could spare to defend Taiwan. If China ever got the impression resources were being diverted... that would be the time to strike. As if that wasn't enough, Iran could similarly sense a pinned-down US and open a third front in the Middle East.

[Michael in ABQ]

Sending 31 tanks 19 months later to a nation fighting the entire Russian army is a giant "fuck you" to Ukraine and the cause of freedom and the buck stops at Biden, unless there is a grand strategy that materializes in the next 10 months (I am perfectly willing to accept this by the way).

The strategy is to send just enough material that Russia cannot win. And of course Ukraine also not (at least not in any short amount of time), because that would deplete Russia less and might make Putin do something terrible somewhere else too.

Why do you think every politician always said "Russia cannot be allowed to win", but nobody said "Ukraine must win"?

Exactly. This is basic US strategy. Don't let any county in Eurasia get too powerful (Nazi Germany, USSR, Russia, China) and use local allies to provide the majority of the fighting power. Also, create a balance of power between regional powers so no one regional power becomes too powerful (Iran vs. Iraq, Israel vs. Arab world, India vs. Pakistan, and now Russia vs. Ukraine).

US strategy for the last 100+ years has been to keep anyone in Eurasia from becoming so powerful they could threaten the US by launching an attack against the homeland across the Atlantic or Pacific oceans that provide a natural barrier. The US can do that by sending troops directly as in WW1 & WW2 or indirectly by providing military support. The goal is always to use the least amount of resources necessary. In WW2 that started with just military support with the lend lease act providing weapons to the USSR, Britain, and other allies but escalated to direct military intervention when it became clear that those other allies couldn't win on their own (and of course Peral Harbor was the ultimate catalyst).

As long as the balance of power between Russia and Ukraine remains intact with current levels of support it is unlikely that any US administration will change that basic strategy.

[Radagast]

¿por que no los dos tres?

Theory 1, which some said was Russia, is possible. Trump leaked Israel's Iron Dome details to the Russians, who supplied the info to Iran, who passed it to Hezbollah, in turn shared with Hamas.

Theory 2 is Theory 1 without the Russian involvement.

Theory 3: This was cooked up by Netanyahu as mentioned. Because for all intents and purposes, having a massive 24/7/365 national security and intel operation caught napping is very suspicious. Also, Bibi plays friendly with Putin.

@Radagast Actually, my blame partially goes to Obama, who didn't do much during his time when Crimea was invaded by Russians in 2014 and he tried to play "both sides".
Also, blame is on US, and UK, who with Russia, had promised to give Ukraine security in exchange for giving up its nukes under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum. That just let the wolf into the hen house.
All these past US actions ended up emboldening Russia.

Yeah I was a little worked up about that last night... probably I need a chill pill.

[Radagast]

Sending 31 tanks 19 months later to a nation fighting the entire Russian army is a giant "fuck you" to Ukraine and the cause of freedom and the buck stops at Biden, unless there is a grand strategy that materializes in the next 10 months (I am perfectly willing to accept this by the way).

The strategy is to send just enough material that Russia cannot win. And of course Ukraine also not (at least not in any short amount of time), because that would deplete Russia less and might make Putin do something terrible somewhere else too.

Why do you think every politician always said "Russia cannot be allowed to win", but nobody said "Ukraine must win"?

That indeed seems to be the policy, at least for right now. Even though it is coldly rational and Ukraine is indeed the only place bordering Russia that has the capacity to defeat Russia (excl. China, NATO) thus sparing the even weaker nations, I still have a bunch of problems with it:
- It seems cruel to make Ukraine destroy individually every gun or piece of armor made by Russia or the Soviets with minimal support
- It seems cruel to make Ukraine sop up every rocket shell and missile made by Russia or the Soviets or spared by Iran and North Korea with minimal support
- Doing this doesn't really encourage potential allies
- It gives lots of opportunity for domestic (US) opposition to derail the careful plan
- It gives Russia a lot of room to encourage other mischief on the sidelines
- It may be seen as a sign of weakness and encourage others
- Others may use the prolonged distraction of US attention and resources to do their own evil thing
- It assumes the situation can be carefully controlled like a fire in a ring, but could the fire escape?

Anyway Europe seems to be on board, so it's not just Biden. I don't know how strong of an endorsement that is.

[Fru-Gal]

Theory 1, which some said was Russia, is possible. Trump leaked Israel's Iron Dome details to the Russians, who supplied the info to Iran, who passed it to Hezbollah, in turn shared with Hamas.

Holy shit!!!

It makes sense.

And yes the circumstantial evidence that Trump has been a cultivated asset of the Russian government for much of his life is devastating and ever-growing. The point made above about him being blackmailed at least twice is an excellent observation. Let’s not forget his best friend, the billionaire blackmailer pedo freak.

IMHO, Ivana’s death was suspicious. I mean, falling down stairs? Blunt injuries to the torso? In her own apartment where she lived for decades? Supposedly she might have been informing on Trump.

It sounds absurd, but is it any more absurd than Trump admitting he shared Israeli intel with the Russians in the Oval Office?!

So where does the $20 B from the Saudis to Kushner fit in to all this?

[Just Joe]

¿por que no los dos tres?

Theory 1, which some said was Russia, is possible. Trump leaked Israel's Iron Dome details to the Russians, who supplied the info to Iran, who passed it to Hezbollah, in turn shared with Hamas.

Theory 2 is Theory 1 without the Russian involvement.

Theory 3: This was cooked up by Netanyahu as mentioned. Because for all intents and purposes, having a massive 24/7/365 national security and intel operation caught napping is very suspicious. Also, Bibi plays friendly with Putin.

@Radagast Actually, my blame partially goes to Obama, who didn't do much during his time when Crimea was invaded by Russians in 2014 and he tried to play "both sides".
Also, blame is on US, and UK, who with Russia, had promised to give Ukraine security in exchange for giving up its nukes under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum. That just let the wolf into the hen house.
All these past US actions ended up emboldening Russia.

Yeah I was a little worked up about that last night... probably I need a chill pill.

Curious how much Obama could have accomplished. The GOP was running constant roadblocks his entire presidency. I guess teh Dems could have called them out on it more aggressively. Or helped Ukraine with NATO support or American military equipment. 

[Michael in ABQ]

Theory 1, which some said was Russia, is possible. Trump leaked Israel's Iron Dome details to the Russians, who supplied the info to Iran, who passed it to Hezbollah, in turn shared with Hamas.

Holy shit!!!

It makes sense.

And yes the circumstantial evidence that Trump has been a cultivated asset of the Russian government for much of his life is devastating and ever-growing. The point made above about him being blackmailed at least twice is an excellent observation. Let’s not forget his best friend, the billionaire blackmailer pedo freak.

IMHO, Ivana’s death was suspicious. I mean, falling down stairs? Blunt injuries to the torso? In her own apartment where she lived for decades? Supposedly she might have been informing on Trump.

It sounds absurd, but is it any more absurd than Trump admitting he shared Israeli intel with the Russians in the Oval Office?!

So where does the $20 B from the Saudis to Kushner fit in to all this?

Two words: Lizard People




If we're going to go down the conspiracy theory rabbit hole you may as well go full lizard people.

[sonofsven]

¿por que no los dos tres?

Theory 1, which some said was Russia, is possible. Trump leaked Israel's Iron Dome details to the Russians, who supplied the info to Iran, who passed it to Hezbollah, in turn shared with Hamas.

Theory 2 is Theory 1 without the Russian involvement.

Theory 3: This was cooked up by Netanyahu as mentioned. Because for all intents and purposes, having a massive 24/7/365 national security and intel operation caught napping is very suspicious. Also, Bibi plays friendly with Putin.

@Radagast Actually, my blame partially goes to Obama, who didn't do much during his time when Crimea was invaded by Russians in 2014 and he tried to play "both sides".
Also, blame is on US, and UK, who with Russia, had promised to give Ukraine security in exchange for giving up its nukes under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum. That just let the wolf into the hen house.
All these past US actions ended up emboldening Russia.

Yeah I was a little worked up about that last night... probably I need a chill pill.

Curious how much Obama could have accomplished. The GOP was running constant roadblocks his entire presidency. I guess teh Dems could have called them out on it more aggressively. Or helped Ukraine with NATO support or American military equipment.

Obama was hamstrung due to the misadventures of GWB in the middle East. We had burned up any presumed "moral authority" we might have had.
There was no appetite for any rescuing of the Syrian people from their oppressors the Syrian and Russian governments.

Perhaps Biden learned from that lesson in relation to our current stance regarding Ukraine.

[Michael in ABQ]

¿por que no los dos tres?

Theory 1, which some said was Russia, is possible. Trump leaked Israel's Iron Dome details to the Russians, who supplied the info to Iran, who passed it to Hezbollah, in turn shared with Hamas.

Theory 2 is Theory 1 without the Russian involvement.

Theory 3: This was cooked up by Netanyahu as mentioned. Because for all intents and purposes, having a massive 24/7/365 national security and intel operation caught napping is very suspicious. Also, Bibi plays friendly with Putin.

@Radagast Actually, my blame partially goes to Obama, who didn't do much during his time when Crimea was invaded by Russians in 2014 and he tried to play "both sides".
Also, blame is on US, and UK, who with Russia, had promised to give Ukraine security in exchange for giving up its nukes under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum. That just let the wolf into the hen house.
All these past US actions ended up emboldening Russia.

Yeah I was a little worked up about that last night... probably I need a chill pill.

Curious how much Obama could have accomplished. The GOP was running constant roadblocks his entire presidency. I guess teh Dems could have called them out on it more aggressively. Or helped Ukraine with NATO support or American military equipment.

Obama still managed to start another war in Libya on the side while he was president - so like every other president in the last few decades he could take a fair amount of unilateral action without Congress backing it. It's not like we still have declarations of war or anything.

[ChpBstrd]

¿por que no los dos tres?

Theory 1, which some said was Russia, is possible. Trump leaked Israel's Iron Dome details to the Russians, who supplied the info to Iran, who passed it to Hezbollah, in turn shared with Hamas.

Theory 2 is Theory 1 without the Russian involvement.

Theory 3: This was cooked up by Netanyahu as mentioned. Because for all intents and purposes, having a massive 24/7/365 national security and intel operation caught napping is very suspicious. Also, Bibi plays friendly with Putin.

@Radagast Actually, my blame partially goes to Obama, who didn't do much during his time when Crimea was invaded by Russians in 2014 and he tried to play "both sides".
Also, blame is on US, and UK, who with Russia, had promised to give Ukraine security in exchange for giving up its nukes under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum. That just let the wolf into the hen house.
All these past US actions ended up emboldening Russia.

Yeah I was a little worked up about that last night... probably I need a chill pill.

Curious how much Obama could have accomplished. The GOP was running constant roadblocks his entire presidency. I guess teh Dems could have called them out on it more aggressively. Or helped Ukraine with NATO support or American military equipment.

Obama still managed to start another war in Libya on the side while he was president - so like every other president in the last few decades he could take a fair amount of unilateral action without Congress backing it. It's not like we still have declarations of war or anything.

Yea we've been living with the consequences of not requiring the president to seek Congressional approval before going to war - as the Constitution requires. Every engagement that was not accompanied by a Congressional declaration of war: Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan - has been a loss or a draw. On the flip side, every Congressionally declared war in American history has been a win. It is as if a war is maybe a bad idea and is doomed to failure if it can't be sold to Congress and to the American people.

[dividendman]

Yea we've been living with the consequences of not requiring the president to seek Congressional approval before going to war - as the Constitution requires. Every engagement that was not accompanied by a Congressional declaration of war: Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan - has been a loss or a draw. On the flip side, every Congressionally declared war in American history has been a win. It is as if a war is maybe a bad idea and is doomed to failure if it can't be sold to Congress and to the American people.

The war of 1812 was not a win.

[Fru-Gal]

Two words: Lizard People

It’s Duck People. If they walk like it, quack like it…

No, but seriously the only conspiratorial thing I mentioned was Ivana’s death. The rest of it is at this point verified. Oh, unless you mean the Manchurian Candidate stuff? Yeah, I grant you that. But it also, as noted by other posters, seems circumstantially proven at this point.

[maizefolk]

In the spirit of exceptions: The first gulf war wasn't declared, but was a pretty clear and complete victory for the USA and allies. Kuwait remains an independent nation to this day which was the objective.

[ChpBstrd]

In the spirit of exceptions: The first gulf war wasn't declared, but was a pretty clear and complete victory for the USA and allies. Kuwait remains an independent nation to this day which was the objective.

Had to look that one up but you're right. Congress passed an "Authorization for Use of Military Force" which is not technically a declaration of war, but could be argued to be functionally the same.

[LennStar]

In the spirit of exceptions: The first gulf war wasn't declared, but was a pretty clear and complete victory for the USA and allies. Kuwait remains an independent nation to this day which was the objective.

Had to look that one up but you're right. Congress passed an "Authorization for Use of Military Force" which is not technically a declaration of war, but could be argued to be functionally the same.

A decleration of war is sent to the other country.
I don't think this Authorization was send to another country.