Biden's sluggishness and inordinate fears are sabotaging Ukraine's chances of survival.

[maxparrish]

As Joe Biden prepares for his very high-stakes summit with NATO members tomorrow (Thursday) the biggest problem will be Joe Biden himself. After a month of fighting and a bloody stalemate Biden and NATO don't have either a victory plan nor an exit plan...committing the same aimless flaws in many of America's past wars. Frustration is increasing among military and national security experts, and so far Biden has been one or two steps behind Putin by "reacting" rather than "acting".

The reality that the administration seems to ignore is that this this war must be concluded sooner than later, and it must be on terms considered a win for Ukraine. To not do so creates one of two unacceptable alternatives: a prolonged stalemate the destroys Ukraine and its people OR a quick end by Ukraine's essential capitulation to Putin. And if the later occurs, Putin will be left unchecked and emboldened by his success. He will have nuclear forces Belorussia, and ready to pickoff one of the 7 members of NATO at his new expanded borders.

But so far, none have a strategic plan for victory. Poland wants peace-keepers, Biden has ruled that out. Russia may use chemical weapons, NATOs response is uncertain. And most importantly, Ukraine must be able to secure its own airspace if NATO wants Ukraine to win. Yet...once again, Biden has denied them the planes to help do that.

Biden's risk-averse approach to Russia could create greater threat, experts say

They say an "emboldened" Putin might be more dangerous than added NATO support.

abcnews.go.com

"In terms of the weapons pipeline, we should be doing much more. We can't let the Ukrainians fly aircraft in their own defense? Forget these ridiculous restrictions on what equipment we can provide a sovereign country who asks for it to defend themselves against an invading force" he said, referencing the U.S. and other allies' hesitancy to hand over fighter jets to Ukraine for fear of Russian retaliation.

Pavel added that additional anti-aircraft and anti-ship weaponry, as well as enhanced intelligence support and humanitarian aid on the ground, could go a long way in resistance efforts.

The path forward should have been self-evident. In the first week of the war. Cease trying to differentiate between offensive and defensive weapons; that is not a path to Ukraine's victory. End the sole reliance on scrounging for systems that Ukraine troops are familiar with, START training Ukrainians on western SAM systems, intermediate range cruise missiles, medium range ballistic missiles, land based harpoon or Hell fire missiles to hit the Russian navy that is firing missiles at Ukraine, with impunity.

Another no win war isn't of benefit to anyone, especially Ukraine.

 

[Roadvirus]

Biden doesn't want to "escalate things"

Well guess what, Joey! Putzin's using hypersonic missiles and has completely wiped Mariupol off the map. Plus his stormtroopers are taking citizens of Maripoul hostage! I'd say things are already "escalating"!

 

[btthegreat]

As Joe Biden prepares for his very high-stakes summit with NATO members tomorrow (Thursday) the biggest problem will be Joe Biden himself. After a month of fighting and a bloody stalemate Biden and NATO don't have either a victory plan nor an exit plan...committing the same aimless flaws in many of America's past wars. Frustration is increasing among military and national security experts, and so far Biden has been one or two steps behind Putin by "reacting" rather than "acting".

The reality that the administration seems to ignore is that this this war must be concluded sooner than later, and it must be on terms considered a win for Ukraine. To not do so creates one of two unacceptable alternatives: a prolonged stalemate the destroys Ukraine and its people OR a quick end by Ukraine's essential capitulation to Putin. And if the later occurs, Putin will be left unchecked and emboldened by his success. He will have nuclear forces Belorussia, and ready to pickoff one of the 7 members of NATO at his new expanded borders.

But so far, none have a strategic plan for victory. Poland wants peace-keepers, Biden has ruled that out. Russia may use chemical weapons, NATOs response is uncertain. And most importantly, Ukraine must be able to secure its own airspace if NATO wants Ukraine to win. Yet...once again, Biden has denied them the planes to help do that.

Biden's risk-averse approach to Russia could create greater threat, experts say

They say an "emboldened" Putin might be more dangerous than added NATO support.

abcnews.go.com

"In terms of the weapons pipeline, we should be doing much more. We can't let the Ukrainians fly aircraft in their own defense? Forget these ridiculous restrictions on what equipment we can provide a sovereign country who asks for it to defend themselves against an invading force" he said, referencing the U.S. and other allies' hesitancy to hand over fighter jets to Ukraine for fear of Russian retaliation.

Pavel added that additional anti-aircraft and anti-ship weaponry, as well as enhanced intelligence support and humanitarian aid on the ground, could go a long way in resistance efforts.

The path forward should have been self-evident. In the first week of the war. Cease trying to differentiate between offensive and defensive weapons; that is not a path to Ukraine's victory. End the sole reliance on scrounging for systems that Ukraine troops are familiar with, START training Ukrainians on western SAM systems, intermediate range cruise missiles, medium range ballistic missiles, land based harpoon or Hell fire missiles to hit the Russian navy that is firing missiles at Ukraine, with impunity.

Another no win war isn't of benefit to anyone, especially Ukraine.

There is barely a word here that I agree with. You actually misstate and move the actual and realistic goals of this administration and our country. Its not our responsibility to make sure Ukraine 'wins' this war or that its territorial integrety remain pristine etc. it is not a signatory to NATO and if we provide the same benefit to nations that are not as though they are, there is no reason for countries to seek alter their behavior and seek NATO member state blessings. It is our goal to make sure that Putin loses a lot more than he wins as a result of this gambit, as a disincentive for the future, and that he can't wage another such war for a very very long time.

We do want Ukraine to remain a democracy, sans a 'Putin puppet', and that it retain its natural resources and stay an effective buffer state against Russian expansion but whether the eastern border remains exactly as Ukraine had it or whether it retain political control over both Donetsk and Lugansk should not be our dealbreaker. Matter of fact having Russia kept busy trying to control a small but resistive and defiant native population in part of Eastern Ukraine might have its benefits.

The real long term goal here is to make sure Russia's economy remains battered and crippled so that it can't afford to rebuild its military back and lacks the political will to try this again for another twenty or thirty years.

You may not like it but distinguishing between offensive and defensive weapons is vital ( at least as a diplomatic matter) to prevent a pretext of escalation. That is not to say that we should be vigilant in opposing underground efforts arm Ukraine to the teeth offensively. Sometimes it is best to take our glass lenses off and take a very very long time to clean them and put them back on!

 

[Mr Person]

Biden doesn't want to "escalate things"

Well guess what, Joey! Putzin's using hypersonic missiles and has completely wiped Mariupol off the map. Plus his stormtroopers are taking citizens of Maripoul hostage! I'd say things are already "escalating"!

Ah yes, the usual lazy hackery when someone says Biden sucks but cannot explain what exactly should have been done, when, and why anyone should accept that doing that would be better. You know, facts and then an argument based on them.

Road's not even baldly asserting that some other plan he's articulated would work. He doesn't even have a bad plan!

Just call Biden bad things and say it's all his fault, then........ well that's as far as bumper sticker politics goes. Seriously, people. At least come up with something about what you would have done and why, viewed in the circumstances at the time you propose it should have been done, would it have achieved more given our national interest (see #3).

 

[Mr Person]

"There have been other cases where U.S. and Russian forces have unfortunately come into friction and World War III didn't start," Pavel said, characterizing the strategy as simplistic. "There are hundreds of options that could be done between what NATO is doing now and risking World War III."

Seriously? There were other undescribed incidents at other times, and therefore we don't need to worry all that much? Even just a No-Fly would be a declaration of war. Did we declare war on the Soviet Union and avoid WWIII? On Russia after any later incidents? Was it in context of defending a country from open aggression that failed to achieve its goals and is turning into an expensive debacle for Putin?

No? Then those other instances really don't mean all that much.

If anything, the article cited in the OP underscores the fact that every single decision made here is made with a whopping big pile of unknowns, probabilities, etc. Which is why you very rarely see people articulating a specific alternate plan. They know they wouldn't be able to make a convincing argument that that specific cost/benefit is better.

Of course, as another poster has noted, so many of the criticisms of Biden on Ukraine take no account of our geopolitical interests. Note: they are not necessarily that Ukraine "win" the war. We might personally like to see that, but from the perspective of our national interest if the war can end with Ukranian concessions, it's a lot better for us than declaring war on Russia. Meanwhile, we keep their economy as crippled as we can to deter future aggression and perhaps eventually force bargaining to end sanctions.



How quick some would bet the lives of >8,000,000,000.

_________
Trumpists in the kitchen with the bumper sticker. I swear....

 

[Jkca1]

Allow me a moment to speak to the heart of the problem;

We want gas at $3.50 a gallon or less
We hate Russia/Putin but we want gas at $3.50 a gallon or less
It's Biden's fault that gas is not $3:50 a gallon so no matter what he does he sucks until gas comes down to $3.50 a gallon or less. Even then he might still suck.

So what's it going to take to get gas at $3.50 a gallon or less? Because that's what we really care about. We cared about the Ukraine for about a week. Now we're in our F150's and it takes a hundred bucks just to drive to the 7/11 to purchase a 6 pack. This is not acceptable. This is un-American. We hate Putin, but we hate high gas prices more.

For those that still don't get it let me help;

"The economy, stupid"

This PSA has been provided for the vast majority of American people still not using electric cars.

 

[lwf]

As Joe Biden prepares for his very high-stakes summit with NATO members tomorrow (Thursday) the biggest problem will be Joe Biden himself. After a month of fighting and a bloody stalemate Biden and NATO don't have either a victory plan nor an exit plan...committing the same aimless flaws in many of America's past wars. Frustration is increasing among military and national security experts, and so far Biden has been one or two steps behind Putin by "reacting" rather than "acting".

The reality that the administration seems to ignore is that this this war must be concluded sooner than later, and it must be on terms considered a win for Ukraine. To not do so creates one of two unacceptable alternatives: a prolonged stalemate the destroys Ukraine and its people OR a quick end by Ukraine's essential capitulation to Putin. And if the later occurs, Putin will be left unchecked and emboldened by his success. He will have nuclear forces Belorussia, and ready to pickoff one of the 7 members of NATO at his new expanded borders.

But so far, none have a strategic plan for victory. Poland wants peace-keepers, Biden has ruled that out. Russia may use chemical weapons, NATOs response is uncertain. And most importantly, Ukraine must be able to secure its own airspace if NATO wants Ukraine to win. Yet...once again, Biden has denied them the planes to help do that.

Biden's risk-averse approach to Russia could create greater threat, experts say

They say an "emboldened" Putin might be more dangerous than added NATO support.

abcnews.go.com

"In terms of the weapons pipeline, we should be doing much more. We can't let the Ukrainians fly aircraft in their own defense? Forget these ridiculous restrictions on what equipment we can provide a sovereign country who asks for it to defend themselves against an invading force" he said, referencing the U.S. and other allies' hesitancy to hand over fighter jets to Ukraine for fear of Russian retaliation.

Pavel added that additional anti-aircraft and anti-ship weaponry, as well as enhanced intelligence support and humanitarian aid on the ground, could go a long way in resistance efforts.

The path forward should have been self-evident. In the first week of the war. Cease trying to differentiate between offensive and defensive weapons; that is not a path to Ukraine's victory. End the sole reliance on scrounging for systems that Ukraine troops are familiar with, START training Ukrainians on western SAM systems, intermediate range cruise missiles, medium range ballistic missiles, land based harpoon or Hell fire missiles to hit the Russian navy that is firing missiles at Ukraine, with impunity.

Another no win war isn't of benefit to anyone, especially Ukraine.

You can't have a strategic plan for victory or an exit plan when you are not at war.

 

[btthegreat]

"There have been other cases where U.S. and Russian forces have unfortunately come into friction and World War III didn't start," Pavel said, characterizing the strategy as simplistic. "There are hundreds of options that could be done between what NATO is doing now and risking World War III."

Seriously? There were other undescribed incidents at other times, and therefore we don't need to worry all that much? Even just a No-Fly would be a declaration of war. Did we declare war on the Soviet Union and avoid WWIII? On Russia after any later incidents? Was it in context of defending a country from open aggression that failed to achieve its goals and is turning into an expensive debacle for Putin?

No? Then those other instances really don't mean all that much.

If anything, the article cited in the OP underscores the fact that every single decision made here is made with a whopping big pile of unknowns, probabilities, etc. Which is why you very rarely see people articulating a specific alternate plan. They know they wouldn't be able to make a convincing argument that that specific cost/benefit is better.

Of course, as another poster has noted, so many of the criticisms of Biden on Ukraine take no account of our geopolitical interests. Note: they are not necessarily that Ukraine "win" the war. We might personally like to see that, but from the perspective of our national interest if the war can end with Ukranian concessions, it's a lot better for us than declaring war on Russia. Meanwhile, we keep their economy as crippled as we can to deter future aggression and perhaps eventually force bargaining to end sanctions.



How quick some would bet the lives of >8,000,000,000.

_________
Trumpists in the kitchen with the bumper sticker. I swear....

I give Biden a very high grade so far in this crisis. He has done a masterful job of creating and containing a broad coalition, and preparing Americans for reality. Reality is not Ukraine 'winning' this conflict militarily. Reality is not that Putin will gain nothing. Reality is not that these sanctions will not end up with holes and breaches. Reality is not that they won't hurt us as well as Russia. Reality in Ukraine is not going to look like The Sound of Music scenic Austrian mountain view with a Julie Andrews voice-over. It was always going to be ugly, vicious and dirty warzone than we could not stop. Hell Ukraine shares a 1,426.07 mile border with a very determined and aggressive adversary in Russia. There was no way to physically stop this, especially when Ukraine itself was sure they would never invade.

 

[bomberfox]

Biden doesn't want to "escalate things"

Well guess what, Joey! Putzin's using hypersonic missiles and has completely wiped Mariupol off the map. Plus his stormtroopers are taking citizens of Maripoul hostage! I'd say things are already "escalating"!

I dunno if you are a fan of international agreements but they matter.

 

[btthegreat]

Allow me a moment to speak to the heart of the problem;

We want gas at $3.50 a gallon or less
We hate Russia/Putin but we want gas at $3.50 a gallon or less
It's Biden's fault that gas is not $3:50 a gallon so no matter what he does he sucks until gas comes down to $3.50 a gallon or less. Even then he might still suck.

So what's it going to take to get gas at $3.50 a gallon or less? Because that's what we really care about. We cared about the Ukraine for about a week. Now we're in our F150's and it takes a hundred bucks just to drive to the 7/11 to purchase a 6 pack. This is not acceptable. This is un-American. We hate Putin, but we hate high gas prices more.

For those that still don't get it let me help;

"The economy, stupid"

This PSA has been provided for the vast majority of American people still not using electric cars.

This is absolutely true, but Ukraine crisis and sanctions just added fuel to a pre-existing blaze. Inflation in this country was already circling around gas price hikes, supply chain woes and disruptions, labor shortages, and wage increases, and fickle consumer spending patterns secondary to worldwide pandemic.

I did not see any effective plan to fight or mitigate the effects that inflation before this all came down.

 

[Jkca1]

This is absolutely true, but Ukraine crisis and sanctions just added fuel to a pre-existing blaze. Inflation in this country was already circling around gas price hikes, supply chain woes and disruptions, labor shortages, and wage increases, and fickle consumer spending patterns secondary to worldwide pandemic.

I am not blaming the Ukraine war for the the higher price of gas. Joe did that already;

“Putin’s gas tax has pushed prices higher.” - Joe Biden.

The American public doesn't care how gas got to $6 bucks. They just want it to end. The donkeys are sh*tting bricks thinking about how to defend gas prices and high inflation this fall and rightfully so. The only way the Ukraine war works for the donkeys is if Russia leaves. Otherwise they are screwed. I think they are screwed. What about you?

 

[Antiwar]

Is 'maxparrish' a play on the words 'maximium perish'? As in, 'I want the maximum amount of people and the habitable planet to perish.'

 

[American]

As Joe Biden prepares for his very high-stakes summit with NATO members tomorrow (Thursday) the biggest problem will be Joe Biden himself. After a month of fighting and a bloody stalemate Biden and NATO don't have either a victory plan nor an exit plan...committing the same aimless flaws in many of America's past wars. Frustration is increasing among military and national security experts, and so far Biden has been one or two steps behind Putin by "reacting" rather than "acting".

The reality that the administration seems to ignore is that this this war must be concluded sooner than later, and it must be on terms considered a win for Ukraine. To not do so creates one of two unacceptable alternatives: a prolonged stalemate the destroys Ukraine and its people OR a quick end by Ukraine's essential capitulation to Putin. And if the later occurs, Putin will be left unchecked and emboldened by his success. He will have nuclear forces Belorussia, and ready to pickoff one of the 7 members of NATO at his new expanded borders.

But so far, none have a strategic plan for victory. Poland wants peace-keepers, Biden has ruled that out. Russia may use chemical weapons, NATOs response is uncertain. And most importantly, Ukraine must be able to secure its own airspace if NATO wants Ukraine to win. Yet...once again, Biden has denied them the planes to help do that.

Biden's risk-averse approach to Russia could create greater threat, experts say

They say an "emboldened" Putin might be more dangerous than added NATO support.

abcnews.go.com

"In terms of the weapons pipeline, we should be doing much more. We can't let the Ukrainians fly aircraft in their own defense? Forget these ridiculous restrictions on what equipment we can provide a sovereign country who asks for it to defend themselves against an invading force" he said, referencing the U.S. and other allies' hesitancy to hand over fighter jets to Ukraine for fear of Russian retaliation.

Pavel added that additional anti-aircraft and anti-ship weaponry, as well as enhanced intelligence support and humanitarian aid on the ground, could go a long way in resistance efforts.

The path forward should have been self-evident. In the first week of the war. Cease trying to differentiate between offensive and defensive weapons; that is not a path to Ukraine's victory. End the sole reliance on scrounging for systems that Ukraine troops are familiar with, START training Ukrainians on western SAM systems, intermediate range cruise missiles, medium range ballistic missiles, land based harpoon or Hell fire missiles to hit the Russian navy that is firing missiles at Ukraine, with impunity.

Another no win war isn't of benefit to anyone, especially Ukraine.

1) Biden hasn't ruled out peacekeepers, he's only ruled out American personnel participation in that.
2) So how fast can they learn American weapons systems?

 

[btthegreat]

I am not blaming the Ukraine war for the the higher price of gas. Joe did that already;

“Putin’s gas tax has pushed prices higher.” - Joe Biden.

The American public doesn't care how gas got to $6 bucks. They just want it to end. The donkeys are sh*tting bricks thinking about how to defend gas prices and high inflation this fall and rightfully so. The only way the Ukraine war works for the donkeys is if Russia leaves. Otherwise they are screwed. I think they are screwed. What about you?

It all depends on how media portrays the end result and that depends on which ''media' the American voter listens to which is a hyper partisan decision in the first place. Let's face it, inflation is bad for the current party in power, regardless of this war. Voters could very likely see Biden as moderately good at handling foreign policy crisis, and horrible at handling the economy. Efforts by Biden to blame the price of ground beef on Putin will fail in all but the most educated and sophisticated and predisposed of voters because they won't connect the dots from that gas price hike in the first place (only some of which is Putin's tax anyway) to that gallon of milk. this was going to be a perfect storm at midterms anyway. this war at best props up Biden's personal popularity numbers a little.

 

[Napoleon]

The propagandists need to decide on what’s happening in Ukraine. Are they handily slaying the Russians or do they need help? The rhetoric certainly doesn’t match Zelensky’s groveling. And if Ukraine is destined for conquest then this is just a waste of military hardware at our expense. Might as well just tie a bow on it and give it to ol’ Vlad.

 

[Rogue Valley]

1) Biden hasn't ruled out peacekeepers, he's only ruled out American personnel participation in that.

Peacekeepers are usually UN personel.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Might as well just tie a bow on it and give it to ol’ Vlad.

Which you would love, Putin fanboi.

 

[Napoleon]

Which you would love, Putin fanboi.

Why are you still here making hit lists in the basement instead of signing up for Zelensky’s foreign legion?

 

[Rogue Valley]

Why are you still here making hit lists in the basement instead of signing up for Zelensky’s foreign legion?

Why aren't you in a Russian regiment in Ukraine?

 

[Napoleon]

Why aren't you in a Russian regiment in Ukraine?

I’m not invested in the outcome of this war. When are you signing up? Or are you just blowing smoke around here?

 

[Rogue Valley]

I’m not invested in the outcome of this war.

You do your Russia propaganda shtick here every day. You're invested to the max.

 

[Napoleon]

You do your Russia propaganda shtick here every day. You're invested to the max.

I’m not here starting dozens of threads and stalking the forums to make hit lists in the basement. So again, why are you spending all of your waking hours being a keyboard warrior instead of signing up for the foreign legion?

 

[maxparrish]

There is barely a word here that I agree with. You actually misstate and move the actual and realistic goals of this administration and our country. Its not our responsibility to make sure Ukraine 'wins' this war or that its territorial integrety remain pristine etc. it is not a signatory to NATO and if we provide the same benefit to nations that are not as though they are, there is no reason for countries to seek alter their behavior and seek NATO member state blessings. It is our goal to make sure that Putin loses a lot more than he wins as a result of this gambit, as a disincentive for the future, and that he can't wage another such war for a very very long time.

So our goal is keep the war going as long as possible, using Ukraine as a sacrificial lamb, to bleed Russian military potency? And therefore, all the rhetorical nonsense about the rights of Ukraine to exist as a sovereign and free nation is a cover, by Biden and NATO, to exploit Ukraine and let its people die for strategic purposes?

In short, the stalemate and the prolonged destruction of Ukraine by a stalemate isn't a flaw, it's a feature.

I'm not in the habit of defending Joe Biden but I don't believe he is that cynical and cruel, nor are NATO's members.

Your rationalization that the slow death of Ukraine as somehow justified because they are not a member is absurd. NATO membership provides a benefit to members, not a moral or legal mandate that NATO itself cannot help anyone but members. Quite aside from the issue of NATO's procrastination and temporizing on Ukraine's request for membership for many years, if NATO members see's it in their interest to help another nation, it may do so...including participation in war (the Balkans, Libra, Afghanistan, etc.) on behalf of a non-member nation.

We do want Ukraine to remain a democracy, sans a 'Putin puppet', and that it retain its natural resources and stay an effective buffer state against Russian expansion but whether the eastern border remains exactly as Ukraine had it or whether it retain political control over both Donetsk and Lugansk should not be our dealbreaker. Matter of fact having Russia kept busy trying to control a small but resistive and defiant native population in part of Eastern Ukraine might have its benefits.

Well then if "we" want that then "we" ought to be supporting a war that does not bleed Ukraine to death or flirt with Ukraine's capitulation. Wars cannot be "fine tuned" to being just right in their outcomes (e.g. Libya) and a final settlement may or may not include Putin's defacto control of Ukraine's political outcomes, that Ukraine retains its natural resources, etc. Putin has made his four demands very clear, and has not budged. If you want to save any country you don't handcuff your own side to the benefit of the enemy...that's dumb.

The real long term goal here is to make sure Russia's economy remains battered and crippled so that it can't afford to rebuild its military back and lacks the political will to try this again for another twenty or thirty years.

You may not like it but distinguishing between offensive and defensive weapons is vital ( at least as a diplomatic matter) to prevent a pretext of escalation. That is not to say that we should be vigilant in opposing underground efforts arm Ukraine to the teeth offensively. Sometimes it is best to take our glass lenses off and take a very very long time to clean them and put them back on!

Pure gibberish.

Our long term goal is not to destroy Russia's economy, and none delude themselves into believing a country as rich in natural resources as Russia can be prevented from rebuilding themselves...which won't require much rebuilding as the entire infrastructure of Russia remains intact. This war, as currently conducted, isn't capable of long term damage even the Russian military forces because, when Russia's resupply of its army runs low...it just entrenches and waits till they are replenished.

And it appears you are afraid of escalation because it a) might break the bloody stalemate you so adore and b) Ukraine might actually regain lost territory and come out with an agreement to their benefit. "Gasp", how unthinkable to the cynical plans of NATO (or so you'd have us believe).

We agree on one thing, if you want to win and keep Ukraine from being destroyed you forget this handcuffing nonsense about "offensive and defensive". If you don't want Ukraine to win and lose its sovereignty and have some kind of resulting dismemberment you do what you advocate NATO continue to do.

I'm sure Putin fully agrees with your military handcuffing of Ukraine.

 

[btthegreat]

So our goal is keep the war going as long as possible, using Ukraine as a sacrificial lamb, to bleed Russian military potency? And therefore, all the rhetorical nonsense about the rights of Ukraine to exist as a sovereign and free nation is a cover, by Biden and NATO, to exploit Ukraine and let its people die for strategic purposes?

In short, the stalemate and the prolonged destruction of Ukraine by a stalemate isn't a flaw, it's a feature.

I'm not in the habit of defending Joe Biden but I don't believe he is that cynical and cruel, nor are NATO's members.

Your rationalization that the slow death of Ukraine as somehow justified because they are not a member is absurd. NATO membership provides a benefit to members, not a moral or legal mandate that NATO itself cannot help anyone but members. Quite aside from the issue of NATO's procrastination and temporizing on Ukraine's request for membership for many years, if NATO members see's it in their interest to help another nation, it may do so...including participation in war (the Balkans, Libra, Afghanistan, etc.) on behalf of a non-member nation.



Well then if "we" want that then "we" ought to be supporting a war that does not bleed Ukraine to death or flirt with Ukraine's capitulation. Wars cannot be "fine tuned" to being just right in their outcomes (e.g. Libya) and a final settlement may or may not include Putin's defacto control of Ukraine's political outcomes, that Ukraine retains its natural resources, etc. Putin has made his four demands very clear, and has not budged. If you want to save any country you don't handcuff your own side to the benefit of the enemy...that's dumb.

Pure gibberish.

Our long term goal is not to destroy Russia's economy, and none delude themselves into believing a country as rich in natural resources as Russia can be prevented from rebuilding themselves...which won't require much rebuilding as the entire infrastructure of Russia remains intact. This war, as currently conducted, isn't capable of long term damage even the Russian military forces because, when Russia's resupply of its army runs low...it just entrenches and waits till they are replenished.

And it appears you are afraid of escalation because it a) might break the bloody stalemate you so adore and b) Ukraine might actually regain lost territory and come out with an agreement to their benefit. "Gasp", how unthinkable to the cynical plans of NATO (or so you'd have us believe).

We agree on one thing, if you want to win and keep Ukraine from being destroyed you forget this handcuffing nonsense about "offensive and defensive". If you don't want Ukraine to win and lose its sovereignty and have some kind of resulting dismemberment you do what you advocate NATO continue to do.

I'm sure Putin fully agrees with your military handcuffing of Ukraine.

You just don't care whether it escalates, how it escalates or which Europeans get thrown on your bonfire. That's pretty convenient for someone living in the San Fransisco Bay area.

 

[TheParser]

Really disappointing that President Biden is NOT visiting the capital of Ukraine.

How electrifying that would be!