Ukraine

[Just Joe]

There was some talk on the weekend news that some negotiation/peace talks are happening behind the scenes, but that nothing will go forward in 2024 because it's an election year in the U.S.

It's so strange to watch the U.S. not go all in to defeat the Russian aggression - this lukewarm, waning support just has to be frightening to the Ukrainians.

Strange that in the future anyone would ally with our government on anything if lives lost doesn't create a sense of urgency for all of Congress. In a normal world I would expect the GOP to feel like aid to Ukraine was as important as a forest fire that needs to be stamped out before it reaches a big, important city.

[Tyson]

There was some talk on the weekend news that some negotiation/peace talks are happening behind the scenes, but that nothing will go forward in 2024 because it's an election year in the U.S.

It's so strange to watch the U.S. not go all in to defeat the Russian aggression - this lukewarm, waning support just has to be frightening to the Ukrainians.

Strange that in the future anyone would ally with our government on anything if lives lost doesn't create a sense of urgency for all of Congress. In a normal world I would expect the GOP to feel like aid to Ukraine was as important as a forest fire that needs to be stamped out before it reaches a big, important city.

I don’t follow politics.  Why is the right acting this way?

[YttriumNitrate]

Strange that in the future anyone would ally with our government on anything if lives lost doesn't create a sense of urgency for all of Congress.

The US has been ignoring lives lost in African conflicts for the last 100+ years. The US acts in its own interest, as it has almost always done. Unfortunately for Ukraine, they are not really a key trading partner with the US.

[pecunia]

There was some talk on the weekend news that some negotiation/peace talks are happening behind the scenes, but that nothing will go forward in 2024 because it's an election year in the U.S.

It's so strange to watch the U.S. not go all in to defeat the Russian aggression - this lukewarm, waning support just has to be frightening to the Ukrainians.

Strange that in the future anyone would ally with our government on anything if lives lost doesn't create a sense of urgency for all of Congress. In a normal world I would expect the GOP to feel like aid to Ukraine was as important as a forest fire that needs to be stamped out before it reaches a big, important city.

I don’t follow politics.  Why is the right acting this way?

I would be interested in an answer to this too.  Hopefully, it would be an answer that just doesn't mimic the rhetoric about the Southern border.  That means they can't handle two separate issues.  it means they can't walk and chew gum.  I've looked for some document describing the ideals and positions of the "New" Republican party, but have found almost nothing.  There's this:

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/issues

However, it seems rather vacuous.

[waltworks]

There is no "right" in the US in the old sense. There is a philosophically incoherent/populist/nihilist faction, though.

I mean, you can't simultaneously be pro-free trade while being for huge tariffs, or for balanced budgets and simultaneously for unlimited medicare/ss/defense money, etc.

There's nothing that makes sense there anymore.

-W

[Travis]

Macron and other EU leaders clarified that they don't mean putting combat troops on the front line. They're still vague on what they actually mean, but it's not this.

France doesn't have the industrial capacity to produce much artillery in the short term. They're expanding, but if the factory infrastructure isn't there, they can't just set fire to money and make it happen. They started the war making 1000 shells per month, and now they're up to 3000.  At the beginning of the war the US was producing 14k 155mm shells per month. By the end up this year we might be up to 60k. That's with expanding an already existing factory and reactivating an old one that hasn't seen use in decades. Russia needing to beg/buy/steal ammo from Belarus and North Korea shows that it's not just us struggling with that kind of production expansion.

Ukrainian/Russian peace negotiations are a bad joke. Every time it comes up, Russia says their "compromise" is exactly what their demands were in March 2022. They want to occupy at least half of Ukraine, Ukraine can't join NATO, might be able to join the EU, and must have a Russia-friendly president. The latter can't happen without the person being a dictator/puppet, and Ukraine could never join the EU under those conditions. And without a western alliance they could be invaded again on a whim. Russia gives nothing in return for this "peace."  Seeing as how Ukrainian civilians have been deported to eastern Russia or tortured/murdered under occupation, children kidnapped and forced to become Russian, POWs regularly tortured and murdered, and key Russian politicians calling for deportation of whole towns to Siberia, why should anybody expect Ukraine to believe anything Russia has to say? Anybody who says "well I just want peace" is tacitly saying they're okay with the above scenario.

US political intransigence can be summarized as "Trump idolizes Putin, and the GOP follows his lead." He likes to talk a big game of US vs China, but the GOP's opposition to helping Ukraine and Trump recently saying he'd let Putin attack NATO while we sit on our hands is giving everyone else in the world who has an alliance or promises with us reasons to start wondering if our word is worth anything. 

The GOP, particularly the farthest Right/Trump-friendly faction does not have a plan for governing, but rather complain and obstruct. McCarthy and Johnson have both attempted to run the House as if they have a mandate to do whatever they want while their majority is only a couple of votes deep. They have passed almost zero legislation of value and we still don't have an FY24 budget.  This Congressional session has been the least productive in a century.

[Travis]

Due to sanctions on spare parts and recent Ukrainian drone attacks, Russia is suspending the export of gasoline for the next six months. Crude and diesel are unaffected for the moment.

https://fxtwitter.com/delfoo/status/1762399545831363017

[Radagast]

France doesn't have the industrial capacity to produce much artillery in the short term. They're expanding, but if the factory infrastructure isn't there, they can't just set fire to money and make it happen. They started the war making 1000 shells per month, and now they're up to 3000.

That's not very much use then is it? Shouldn't Macron have threatened to increase shell production to 100k per month, or to send aircraft, or missiles or something, you know, threatening? Anything France could bring to the fight they could just hand to Ukraine right now to the same effect. Unless they want to be like Putin and send meat.

US political intransigence can be summarized as "Trump idolizes Putin, and the GOP follows his lead." He likes to talk a big game of US vs China, but the GOP's opposition to helping Ukraine and Trump recently saying he'd let Putin attack NATO while we sit on our hands is giving everyone else in the world who has an alliance or promises with us reasons to start wondering if our word is worth anything.

The GOP, particularly the farthest Right/Trump-friendly faction does not have a plan for governing, but rather complain and obstruct. McCarthy and Johnson have both attempted to run the House as if they have a mandate to do whatever they want while their majority is only a couple of votes deep. They have passed almost zero legislation of value and we still don't have an FY24 budget.  This Congressional session has been the least productive in a century.

Elected Republicans fear Trump more than either God or Putin, which is all that needs to be said about the former "Party of Lincoln" or "Party of Reagan".

[MustacheAndaHalf]

French President Macron is all talk - he's full of it.  I saw a political cartoon showing Ukraine's army opening boxes of ammunition, with most of them filled with "blah blah blah" instead of ammo.  France talks then does nothing.

"Of Europe's big military powers, France is doing the most lackluster job in sending arms and ammunition to Ukraine, according to a new calculation of international aid by Germany's Kiel Institute."
https://www.politico.eu/article/military-aid-ukraine-france-way-behind-germany/

[Telecaster]

Fantastic news!  At least potentially fantastic news.   The US is considering drawing down existing munitions stocks without waiting for Congress to fund replacements.  I've previously suggested the US should consider this.

The reality is that every president since Bill Clinton (briefly) through Obama tried to approach Putin basically the same way, by finding areas of common agreement and compromising on the differences.  This approach failed.  Putin consistently worked to undermine the interests of the United States in virtually every way possible, from supporting hostile foreign entities,  providing arms to hostile foreign governments, supporting hacker and ransomware attacks on US entities, and widescale interference in the 2016 elections.  Trying to disable our democratic institutions in my view is the equivalent of an act of war.    Putin is our clear, undeniable enemy.   Putin supporters are anti-American in actual fact.   

Thus far, the Pentagon has been reluctant to draw down our defense reserves in order to preserve our own national security readiness needs.  However, besides Russia drawing down its reserves, our global adversaries like North Korea and Iran and drawing down their reserves too in order to supply Russia.  If the United States is involved in a shooting conflict it will likely be against an enemy with Russian supplied equipment, and there is simply less of that available than there used to be.   I realize that is an over simplification, but now is a good time to reassess our own defense needs in the short term.     

Many pro-Putin Republicans complain that American tax dollars are being spent in Ukraine when we have unmet needs domestically.  The last part is true, but most of the Ukraine weapons aid is spent in the US by US companies employing US workers.   It is basically a domestic jobs program, and not particularly expensive compared to the rest of the defense budget.   And our national security is also a domestic need that requires resources.   Funding Ukraine is a very efficient use of those dollars.   

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/biden-ukraine-weapons-without-replacing-us-stocks-waiting-congress-rcna140748

[LennStar]

What I don't understand in this is arty ammo. Why does the US need a stockpile for itself?

If they want to create new terrorists, they just air-bomb somewhere in the Orient, like always.

Taiwan is so small, it's easier to sea-bombard any enemy that lands there. Japan has such a small space where you could use arty, it's basically the same - air or sea is easier for the US.

The only reason for big US arty stockpiles is A) Russia triggers NATO or B) Canada and Mexico team up with a surprise attack on every military aircraft they know about.
I doubt your neighbors want to have a fight, and Russia is currently busy, and if it's for that reason, it's cheaper to send the ammo to Ukraine than use it yourself.

So even if you don't increase the pre-war ammo buying, you will still end up with the same stockpile because you would have to get rid of the old ones anyway sometime. It's just a matter of time.

[Radagast]

Fantastic news!  At least potentially fantastic news.   The US is considering drawing down existing munitions stocks without waiting for Congress to fund replacements.  I've previously suggested the US should consider this.

The reality is that every president since Bill Clinton (briefly) through Obama tried to approach Putin basically the same way, by finding areas of common agreement and compromising on the differences.  This approach failed.  Putin consistently worked to undermine the interests of the United States in virtually every way possible, from supporting hostile foreign entities,  providing arms to hostile foreign governments, supporting hacker and ransomware attacks on US entities, and widescale interference in the 2016 elections.  Trying to disable our democratic institutions in my view is the equivalent of an act of war.    Putin is our clear, undeniable enemy.   Putin supporters are anti-American in actual fact.   

Thus far, the Pentagon has been reluctant to draw down our defense reserves in order to preserve our own national security readiness needs.  However, besides Russia drawing down its reserves, our global adversaries like North Korea and Iran and drawing down their reserves too in order to supply Russia.  If the United States is involved in a shooting conflict it will likely be against an enemy with Russian supplied equipment, and there is simply less of that available than there used to be.   I realize that is an over simplification, but now is a good time to reassess our own defense needs in the short term.     

Many pro-Putin Republicans complain that American tax dollars are being spent in Ukraine when we have unmet needs domestically.  The last part is true, but most of the Ukraine weapons aid is spent in the US by US companies employing US workers.   It is basically a domestic jobs program, and not particularly expensive compared to the rest of the defense budget.   And our national security is also a domestic need that requires resources.   Funding Ukraine is a very efficient use of those dollars.   

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/biden-ukraine-weapons-without-replacing-us-stocks-waiting-congress-rcna140748

There seems to be a strong impulse to exaggerate the value of arms provided to Ukraine. Politicians appeal to the pro-Ukraine crowd by maximizing the stated value, while Putinists try to kill it by maximizing the same stated value. Most of it is clearing out badly depreciated stocks and in some cases modest increases to production capacity that could be useful in the future anyway. I know there was an accounting fix last year to address this, but without any knowledge it still seems to overstate the value of the items sent. Shells and armored vehicles have similar lifespans as automobiles, and what we are sending is generally 20+ years old and even that is often just refurbs of older items. Having a brand new stock of shells made in 2025-2030 will not be much more expensive than if those shells were gradually replaced from 2022-2035, especially after factoring in disposal costs. I've said this before, but my observation has been that the contractors responsible for demilitarizing munitions are monuments to inefficiency even by government standards. It would be much cheaper to pay for bulk shipping to Ukraine.

[pecunia]

Fantastic news!  At least potentially fantastic news.   The US is considering drawing down existing munitions stocks without waiting for Congress to fund replacements.  I've previously suggested the US should consider this.

The reality is that every president since Bill Clinton (briefly) through Obama tried to approach Putin basically the same way, by finding areas of common agreement and compromising on the differences.  This approach failed.  Putin consistently worked to undermine the interests of the United States in virtually every way possible, from supporting hostile foreign entities,  providing arms to hostile foreign governments, supporting hacker and ransomware attacks on US entities, and widescale interference in the 2016 elections.  Trying to disable our democratic institutions in my view is the equivalent of an act of war.    Putin is our clear, undeniable enemy.   Putin supporters are anti-American in actual fact.   

Thus far, the Pentagon has been reluctant to draw down our defense reserves in order to preserve our own national security readiness needs.  However, besides Russia drawing down its reserves, our global adversaries like North Korea and Iran and drawing down their reserves too in order to supply Russia.  If the United States is involved in a shooting conflict it will likely be against an enemy with Russian supplied equipment, and there is simply less of that available than there used to be.   I realize that is an over simplification, but now is a good time to reassess our own defense needs in the short term.     

Many pro-Putin Republicans complain that American tax dollars are being spent in Ukraine when we have unmet needs domestically.  The last part is true, but most of the Ukraine weapons aid is spent in the US by US companies employing US workers.   It is basically a domestic jobs program, and not particularly expensive compared to the rest of the defense budget.   And our national security is also a domestic need that requires resources.   Funding Ukraine is a very efficient use of those dollars.   

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/biden-ukraine-weapons-without-replacing-us-stocks-waiting-congress-rcna140748

This thought didn't occur to me until just now when I read this.  When have Republicans cared about domestic US issues?  They are the party that continually wants to "reform" Medicare and Social Security with cuts to their funding.  They were adamant  in their opposition to the health care support that Obamacare provided.  They have been against the EPA and therefore a clean environment.  I could do a little research and make a list, but isn't it odd for Republicans to give a rat's a** about domestic programs?  At least this would include
any domestic programs that are for the common good.

The excuses being offered seem like red herrings to distract the idea that they simply don't wish to support Ukraine.

The only reason for big US arty stockpiles is A) Russia triggers NATO or B) Canada and Mexico team up with a surprise attack on every military aircraft they know about.
I doubt your neighbors want to have a fight, and Russia is currently busy, and if it's for that reason, it's cheaper to send the ammo to Ukraine than use it yourself.

Come on Canadians roll over us and don't forget to give us your health care plan.

[Radagast]

^Also this completely ignores the net present value of Russia being unable to threaten anyone for decades or even ever. We are sending $10B of actual value which accrues solely to Ukraine, calling it $100B because we also spent $90B on ourselves, and getting an unknowable future value of $100B-$10T. More please!

[ChpBstrd]

Republican opposition to national security can only be explained as a trade in exchange for help from Putin's internet operatives, as occurred in 2016 and 2020. This is not some conspiracy theory; it's a U.S. government documented fact that Russia swayed votes toward Trump in both elections. 2024 is no different.

[Telecaster]

This thought didn't occur to me until just now when I read this.  When have Republicans cared about domestic US issues? 

And it is even more galling because they linked Ukraine Aid to a border deal.  When Democrats agreed to the border deal, the MAGA Republicans pulled the rug.   The reason is they believe that while the lack of a border deal hurts America, it will hurt Biden more.   They are fine with hurting their country as long as they can gain power.  Same with the Jan. 6 deniers.    My opinion of people like that is pretty low.   

Republican opposition to national security can only be explained as a trade in exchange for help from Putin's internet operatives, as occurred in 2016 and 2020. This is not some conspiracy theory; it's a U.S. government documented fact that Russia swayed votes toward Trump in both elections. 2024 is no different.

Indeed.  Putin is already working to elect Trump, knowing that Trump will not act in the interests of the United States when it comes to Russia.   And not just Ukraine.   Trump capitulated to Putin on other issues as well.   

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/investigations/russias-2024-election-interference-already-begun-rcna134204

[Radagast]

This thought didn't occur to me until just now when I read this.  When have Republicans cared about domestic US issues? 

And it is even more galling because they linked Ukraine Aid to a border deal.  When Democrats agreed to the border deal, the MAGA Republicans pulled the rug.   The reason is they believe that while the lack of a border deal hurts America, it will hurt Biden more.   They are fine with hurting their country as long as they can gain power.  Same with the Jan. 6 deniers.    My opinion of people like that is pretty low. 

And the doubly interesting thing is that it wasn't even allowed to get a vote by Republican leadership, because they know most of the country supports it.

[zolotiyeruki]

This thought didn't occur to me until just now when I read this.  When have Republicans cared about domestic US issues?  They are the party that continually wants to "reform" Medicare and Social Security with cuts to their funding.  They were adamant  in their opposition to the health care support that Obamacare provided.  They have been against the EPA and therefore a clean environment.  I could do a little research and make a list, but isn't it odd for Republicans to give a rat's a** about domestic programs?  At least this would include
any domestic programs that are for the common good.

The excuses being offered seem like red herrings to distract the idea that they simply don't wish to support Ukraine.

At the risk of dragging this thread off topic...

As a member of the GOP (although I cannot speak for all Republicans and certainly not for the politicians) I'd like to offer an alternative point of view.  It's important not to jump to conclusions about people's motivations, and certainly not assign motivations laid out by those people's opponents.

"against the EPA"?  I'd frame it as "against EPA (and other government agency) overreach."  Sackett v. EPA is the poster child for this.  The ATF's consistent stretching (and at times outright violation) of their legislative mandates is another.  There are plenty of stories to choose from.  Obamacare has done little to reduce actual healthcare costs, but rather shuffles and obfuscates the costs in order to present a lower HC premium to consumers, while creating all sorts of additional bureaucratic costs.

You have to also acknowledge that skepticism of government policies is warranted, given the number of well-meaning but ultimately ineffective, counterproductive, and/or overly costly government initiatives we've seen over the decades, not to mention the politicization of such government funding.  And since all the political hay is made when enacting a program, you seldom hear about a failing program getting shut down (and those costs saved).

Anyway, back on topic: I'm totally with you on the consternation over the House GOP leadership's stonewalling of Ukraine aid.  It's the Right Thing to do.  We can speculate all day about their reasoning for blocking it, and there are lots of plausible ideas:
1) they want a better border deal in exchange for passing something that the democrats want
1a) they wanted to poison-pill the Ukraine aid with border security, and make the democrats vote against it?  I dunno, this one seems like a stretch.
2) they want to delay a border+Ukraine deal until Trump presumably takes office (c'mon, even *I'm* not that cynical)
3) they're opposed to it on principle, simply because the democrats want it
4) they're afraid of the more extreme wing of the party
5) they're somehow under Russia's influence
6) they're stupid or misinformed or caught up in their own echo chamber (I can buy this one)


Personally, I think it's probably mostly #6, with a little bit of #1.  Betting in favor Hanlon's Razor is usually a wise choice.

I'm really hoping the democrats and moderate republicans can push through a discharge petition...

[waltworks]

I think it's simpler, the GOP I grew up with no longer exists, and party now exists for the sole purpose of opposing things democrats want (sometimes good, sometimes not) and doing whatever Donald Trumps feels like (basically always terrible at least WRT foreign policy).

Last I checked there was no coherent policy platform on any issue whatsoever. So it's kinda hard to say where the Ukraine funding opposition is coming from.

-W

[Travis]

Anyway, back on topic: I'm totally with you on the consternation over the House GOP leadership's stonewalling of Ukraine aid.  It's the Right Thing to do.  We can speculate all day about their reasoning for blocking it, and there are lots of plausible ideas:
1) they want a better border deal in exchange for passing something that the democrats want
1a) they wanted to poison-pill the Ukraine aid with border security, and make the democrats vote against it?  I dunno, this one seems like a stretch.
2) they want to delay a border+Ukraine deal until Trump presumably takes office (c'mon, even *I'm* not that cynical)
3) they're opposed to it on principle, simply because the democrats want it
4) they're afraid of the more extreme wing of the party
5) they're somehow under Russia's influence
6) they're stupid or misinformed or caught up in their own echo chamber (I can buy this one)

Multiple members of the GOP Senate and House have admitted to 2 and 3, flat out stating they don't want Biden to have the W while simultaneously calling the border a national security emergency. #5 has been speculated since 2016, and isn't a stretch at all considering how much Trump adores Putin, members of his campaign staff were identified coordinating with Russian officials, the "smoking gun" for a Biden impeachment just admitted to pushing a lie on behalf of Russian intelligence, and several members of Congress continue to copy/paste Russian talking points regarding Ukraine. #6 just becomes an extension of the ones who are doing it maliciously.

[LennStar]

Personally, I think it's probably mostly #6, with a little bit of #1.  Betting in favor Hanlon's Razor is usually a wise choice.

The key word in

Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

is adequately.

No stupidity in the world can adequately explain not helping Ukraine. Except you count being Putins socket puppet a stupidity.

[Cawl]

Regarding Republicans, you guys are trying to use Neocon talking points on people who have rejected Neoconservativism. People saw how that philosophy worked out in the Iraq War.

[Radagast]

Is it even worth responding to the Russian stooge? This is Exhibit A in why all possible supplies should be given to Ukraine ASAP, and this stoogery itself is the leading difference with Iraq and the reason why weapons should be given and large quantities and short time frame.

[bacchi]

Regarding Republicans, you guys are trying to use Neocon talking points on people who have rejected Neoconservativism. People saw how that philosophy worked out in the Iraq War.

The neoconservatism that supported the Iraq war was about remaking a dictatorship into a democracy. Supplying arms to Ukraine is preventing a democracy from being taken over by a dictator.

[pecunia]

Regarding Republicans, you guys are trying to use Neocon talking points on people who have rejected Neoconservativism. People saw how that philosophy worked out in the Iraq War.

The neoconservatism that supported the Iraq war was about remaking a dictatorship into a democracy. Supplying arms to Ukraine is preventing a democracy from being taken over by a dictator.

Very good point - Comparing apples and oranges.  I am slowly beginning to recognize more and more "Whataboutisms" that just don't hold up under even my own ignorant scrutiny.

Just the same - What happened to the neocons?  They ruled the Republican roost just a few years ago.  How have they been silenced by the MAGAs?

[dividendman]

I guess it would be too much to hope for consistency, at least. I get the "no foreign aid at all" camp... even if that's an error. But... nobody is in that camp.

It boggles my mind that anyone could approve funding for the Israeli military and at the same time deny Ukraine funds (or, not even funds, but weapons we are never going to use).

[Chaplin]

Just the same - What happened to the neocons?  They ruled the Republican roost just a few years ago.  How have they been silenced by the MAGAs?

I believe the Tea Party supplanted them in the name of fiscal conservatism and they paved the way for the current incarnation.

[pecunia]

Just the same - What happened to the neocons?  They ruled the Republican roost just a few years ago.  How have they been silenced by the MAGAs?

I believe the Tea Party supplanted them in the name of fiscal conservatism and they paved the way for the current incarnation.

Politics is weird stuff.  They say one thing and often do another.  I knew Republican administrations had run up the National debt, but this stuff from Dark Brandon and Company is a mite disturbing.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/02/15/fact-sheet-the-congressional-republican-agenda-to-increase-the-debt-by-over-3-trillion/

I guess finding aid for Ukraine is certainly not the only issue with contemporary US politics.  This hope they can get this one issue worked out soon.

[MustacheAndaHalf]

Congress just returned from recess (when they take time off from official business, not to run around during elementary school - although sometimes I'm not sure which one is taking place in Congress).  A short delay to decide the budget makes sense, but they have done nothing but delay making a budget.

I hope Congress will spend money at U.S. arms factories, and also send weapons to Ukraine.

[LennStar]

3 days of very heavy fighting (and losses of Russian material). They are storming Robotyne, the village where the Ukrainian summer asault created a pocket in the Russian lines, bot no punch through.

There is the story that 4 Ukrainian soldiers managed (with heavy drone support) to repel a night attack of 3 IFV + 3 dozen troops.

[zolotiyeruki]

Gee, I remember when 25 artillery pieces destroyed in one day was awesome. And then when the Ukrainians set a record of over 30.  And then when they set a record for over 40.  Recently, anything *under* 40/day is the aberration.

[rocketpj]

Just the same - What happened to the neocons?  They ruled the Republican roost just a few years ago.  How have they been silenced by the MAGAs?

They thought they could use the MAGAs to gain or keep power.  Useful idiots and all that.  But then the lunatics took over the asylum.

Which is why you see more and more 'moderate' democratic converts in a lot of areas, because there is no room in the Republican party for anything other than servicing one man's fragile but desperate ego.  Everything else is subordinate to that, it is all about fealty to that gibbering moron.  Governance, alliances, treaties, human decency - all irrelevant to the current Republican party.

it's a damn shame really.  A healthy bird needs two wings to fly, left and right.  Now we have one wing trying desperately to keep the bird in the air while the other wing has transformed into something else entirely that assumes the bird flies without effort and is instead yelling about transgender people for some reason.  [Insert sound effect of fighter plane corkscrewing into the ground here]

[pecunia]

Just the same - What happened to the neocons?  They ruled the Republican roost just a few years ago.  How have they been silenced by the MAGAs?

They thought they could use the MAGAs to gain or keep power.  Useful idiots and all that.  But then the lunatics took over the asylum.

Which is why you see more and more 'moderate' democratic converts in a lot of areas, because there is no room in the Republican party for anything other than servicing one man's fragile but desperate ego.  Everything else is subordinate to that, it is all about fealty to that gibbering moron.  Governance, alliances, treaties, human decency - all irrelevant to the current Republican party.

it's a damn shame really.  A healthy bird needs two wings to fly, left and right.  Now we have one wing trying desperately to keep the bird in the air while the other wing has transformed into something else entirely that assumes the bird flies without effort and is instead yelling about transgender people for some reason.  [Insert sound effect of fighter plane corkscrewing into the ground here]

I guess you are right.  They are supposed to be the party of Lincoln.  They've had Teddy Roosevelt, Eisenhower and a lot of good politicians.  Even Nixon started the EPA and OSHA.  I can't picture today's Republicans coming up with something good.

Maybe the No Name people will coalesce into a new party or the Forward Party will gain some momentum.  It's not much of a democracy if you don't have the choice of a viable alternative.

[LennStar]

Ukraine is keeping it's shedule of one ship per month. This time it was the Sergey Kotov

A patrol ship from Russia's Black Sea Fleet, Sergey Kotov, was hit and destroyed in an overnight attack orchestrated by Ukraine's military intelligence agency (HUR), HUR confirmed.

It was hit by naval drones close to the Kerch bridge. (Whatever close means here)
Interestingly there are reports that Russians planned to put air defence system on it - I guess to protect the Kerch bridge.

[pecunia]

Just wondering - Ukraine has been blowing up more and more stuff inside Russia in recent weeks.  If they escalate this, what will happen?

Will Russians be more committed to the "Special Military Operation?"  Will this give Russians a "real" reason to support this crazy war?

Will Russians see this and have the voice of sanity prevail?  Will they say, it's time to stop this war fighting their Ukrainian cousins?

Russia is a big country and things are really spread out.  Maybe there will be no effect.  Putin may ensure that one part of the country simply doesn't know what s happening in other parts of the country.

[LennStar]

Nobody knows. My 2 cents:

People that are behind the war anyway, that will not change much, or they are against it and that will only make them more against. But they will not speak up, because they know what happens to them if they do.

Will they say, it's time to stop this war fighting their Ukrainian cousins?

They fight against an attack from NATO. And if Ukrainians cannot stop doing what NATO orders them, then those weaklings should be killed.

The Russian society is a mafia mind. I know how that sounds, but everything I have seen in the last years points to this. Trample the weak, who isn't my follower is my enemy and so on.

Either Ukraine get's wiped from the map (except a small Russia-controlled buffer), or Russia loses the ability to fight.
Again, at current rates this will happen in about 1,5 years. Russia is currently losing heavy vehicles at double the speed they can produce or get them from storage. Only 20% is new. And the stuff from storage will get worse and worse.

Artillery shell production is also at 1/3-1/2 of needs - this is at 24h shifts. New factories (and supply for them) will take several years.

If Ukraine is supplied by the West, it will likely win in 2-3 years. If not, it will lose at the end of this year (with Russians pushing through lines in the summer).

You do not win wars with logistics, but you lose them without. 

Also, additionally to pure military production, the war costs and sanctions will also take about 1-2 years more to reach critical levels in the general society.

Nothing in Russian society will stop that war before then.

[Radagast]

Generally I agree with all of the above, and note that the rate of attrition is determined by the level of NATO support as much as it is by Russian stocks. If they increase their level support above anything they have done so far that timeframe could be accelerated.

If not, it will lose at the end of this year (with Russians pushing through lines in the summer).

I don't think I see that. It would just become again a situation like March 2022, where they are no longer able to hold a solid minimum length line, and have to trade territory for Russian losses. Russia still does not have the forces to take the country all at once given the organized, determined, and still well armed resistance. They'd have to move at a snails pace in order to digest what they chew off, otherwise results would be similar to 2022. The exception I guess might be if Ukraine loses it's air defenses and Russia is able to fly whatever it wants wherever it wants, then guerilla warfare is the best they could hope for. I think that is unlikely though, Russia would always be at great risk flying over Ukraine.

I'll add that if NATO, for any reason whatsoever including all the blah blah reasons that have been raised in the thread, fails to arm Ukraine sufficiently to defeat Russia, then history will judge them very harshly and so will I. All I've seen is dithering and talking and undercutting, and even the most effective actions have been deliberately half-assed and purposely limited in effectiveness.

[Sibley]

I'll add that if NATO the United States, for any reason whatsoever including all the blah blah reasons that have been raised in the thread, fails to arm Ukraine sufficiently to defeat Russia, then history will judge them very harshly and so will I. All I've seen is dithering and talking and undercutting, and even the most effective actions have been deliberately half-assed and purposely limited in effectiveness.

Fixed that for you.

[pecunia]

I'll add that if NATO the United States, for any reason whatsoever including all the blah blah reasons that have been raised in the thread, fails to arm Ukraine sufficiently to defeat Russia, then history will judge them very harshly and so will I. All I've seen is dithering and talking and undercutting, and even the most effective actions have been deliberately half-assed and purposely limited in effectiveness.

Fixed that for you.

That was a better focus.  After I read that I thought that maybe the name of Mike Johnson could be put in that slot instead of the United States.  Then I read this linked article.  Marjorie Taylor Greene could be listed as the cause for the lack of support to Ukraine.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2024/3/4/2227393/-Democrats-are-really-ramping-up-the-pressure-on-House-speaker-for-Ukraine-aid

Just the same, what's more important retaining an important political position where you are basically stopped from doing what the people want or doing the right thing?  Speaker Johnson is purported to be a mega Christian guy.  Well - I remember stories about brave Christians who willingly sacrificed themselves to Roman lions.  Perhaps Speaker Johnson will sacrifice himself to see some good is done in this world.

[Tyson]

I'll add that if NATO the United States, for any reason whatsoever including all the blah blah reasons that have been raised in the thread, fails to arm Ukraine sufficiently to defeat Russia, then history will judge them very harshly and so will I. All I've seen is dithering and talking and undercutting, and even the most effective actions have been deliberately half-assed and purposely limited in effectiveness.

Fixed that for you.

That was a better focus.  After I read that I thought that maybe the name of Mike Johnson could be put in that slot instead of the United States.  Then I read this linked article.  Marjorie Taylor Greene could be listed as the cause for the lack of support to Ukraine.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2024/3/4/2227393/-Democrats-are-really-ramping-up-the-pressure-on-House-speaker-for-Ukraine-aid

Just the same, what's more important retaining an important political position where you are basically stopped from doing what the people want or doing the right thing?  Speaker Johnson is purported to be a mega Christian guy.  Well - I remember stories about brave Christians who willingly sacrificed themselves to Roman lions.  Perhaps Speaker Johnson will sacrifice himself to see some good is done in this world.

Seems like every time I hear about shenanigans (cheating, basically) it's always some jerk on the right.

[Radagast]

Sure, you say that as an American, but Europe would be judged even more harshly. They'd suffer all the same consequences as the US would, but Ukraine is much closer to their homes and lives and therefore more relevant to them. Plus they'd have put their own defense needs in the hands of the US (lol, dumbasses) and found themselves unsupported when they needed it. That said if the US is unable to do such an easy and obviously self interested thing as support Ukraine, then really the whole post-WW2 system could just disappear along with all the trade and prosperity that came with it. In a poker analogy, other nations would be calling our apparent bluff. It doesn't matter in this case if our cards are any good, just being called will be very costly.

In other news Victoria Nuland, outspoken proponent of Ukraine, was passed over for promotion and retired.
George Galloway, paid Russian propogandist, was elected to the British Parliament.

Even having said months ago that propaganda was Russia's only path to victory and therefore we should see all possible efforts concentrated on that front, it's still breathtaking to watch them mercilessly paralyze and tear down our nations at will.

[Just Joe]

Not sure it indicates anything real but the YouTube video channels showing the war from the Ukrainian perspectives have comment sections that seem to be overwhelmed by Russian supporters lately.

[ChpBstrd]

Even having said months ago that propaganda was Russia's only path to victory and therefore we should see all possible efforts concentrated on that front, it's still breathtaking to watch them mercilessly paralyze and tear down our nations at will.

The root problem of why Western democracies cannot seem to agree on defending themselves has something to do with the root problem of why the American middle class keeps voting against its own interests.

It has something to do with a lifestyle where we spend hours every day exposing ourselves to digital media paid for by unseen interests who want us to do something we wouldn't otherwise do.

[pecunia]

Even having said months ago that propaganda was Russia's only path to victory and therefore we should see all possible efforts concentrated on that front, it's still breathtaking to watch them mercilessly paralyze and tear down our nations at will.

The root problem of why Western democracies cannot seem to agree on defending themselves has something to do with the root problem of why the American middle class keeps voting against its own interests.

It has something to do with a lifestyle where we spend hours every day exposing ourselves to digital media paid for by unseen interests who want us to do something we wouldn't otherwise do.

Did Orwell get it slightly wrong?  Is Big Brother actually these capitalist organizations that blast endless advertising at us?  The idea that it even leaves us with a poor defense posture is disturbing.

[ChpBstrd]

Even having said months ago that propaganda was Russia's only path to victory and therefore we should see all possible efforts concentrated on that front, it's still breathtaking to watch them mercilessly paralyze and tear down our nations at will.

The root problem of why Western democracies cannot seem to agree on defending themselves has something to do with the root problem of why the American middle class keeps voting against its own interests.

It has something to do with a lifestyle where we spend hours every day exposing ourselves to digital media paid for by unseen interests who want us to do something we wouldn't otherwise do.

Did Orwell get it slightly wrong?  Is Big Brother actually these capitalist organizations that blast endless advertising at us?  The idea that it even leaves us with a poor defense posture is disturbing.

There's a common idea that if we can just avoid government control of industry we can avoid Orwellian authoritarianism. But what else is the definition of communism, if not the merger of government and industry?

If the tech billionaires do not call themselves a politburo, but nonetheless control politics, propaganda, and what people think, are we really in a different position than the people who live under a politburo? We simply changed the name of our leadership, and yet they still control both politics and the means of production.

[Tyson]

Even having said months ago that propaganda was Russia's only path to victory and therefore we should see all possible efforts concentrated on that front, it's still breathtaking to watch them mercilessly paralyze and tear down our nations at will.

The root problem of why Western democracies cannot seem to agree on defending themselves has something to do with the root problem of why the American middle class keeps voting against its own interests.

It has something to do with a lifestyle where we spend hours every day exposing ourselves to digital media paid for by unseen interests who want us to do something we wouldn't otherwise do.

Did Orwell get it slightly wrong?  Is Big Brother actually these capitalist organizations that blast endless advertising at us?  The idea that it even leaves us with a poor defense posture is disturbing.

There's a common idea that if we can just avoid government control of industry we can avoid Orwellian authoritarianism. But what else is the definition of communism, if not the merger of government and industry?

If the tech billionaires do not call themselves a politburo, but nonetheless control politics, propaganda, and what people think, are we really in a different position than the people who live under a politburo? We simply changed the name of our leadership, and yet they still control both politics and the means of production.

I think we've avoided the dystopia of Orwell but not Huxley.

[jrhampt]

I think we're headed more for a dystopia in the style of Ready Player One.

[GuitarStv]

Did Orwell get it slightly wrong?  Is Big Brother actually these capitalist organizations that blast endless advertising at us?  The idea that it even leaves us with a poor defense posture is disturbing.

Yes, yes, and yes.

[dividendman]

Even having said months ago that propaganda was Russia's only path to victory and therefore we should see all possible efforts concentrated on that front, it's still breathtaking to watch them mercilessly paralyze and tear down our nations at will.

The root problem of why Western democracies cannot seem to agree on defending themselves has something to do with the root problem of why the American middle class keeps voting against its own interests.

It has something to do with a lifestyle where we spend hours every day exposing ourselves to digital media paid for by unseen interests who want us to do something we wouldn't otherwise do.

Did Orwell get it slightly wrong?  Is Big Brother actually these capitalist organizations that blast endless advertising at us?  The idea that it even leaves us with a poor defense posture is disturbing.

At least it's good for stocks!... at least for a while.

[Just Joe]

I think we're headed more for a dystopia in the style of Ready Player One.

Ready Player One and WALL-E (mounds of refuse, willfully helpless humans, throw away consumerism).