No but it would be nice if people would quit calling Trump a Russian asset when it was Obama who bent the knee to Putin's let's say territorial aggressiveness. While many Democrat politicians and their kids were getting rich over there in Ukraine.
Putin would agree with you.
What Obama should have done is have approved serious military aide to Ukraine upon the first rumblings over Crimea. Perhaps if he had done so the Donbass incursion by Russian forces might not have occurred.
Supplying Ukraine with blankets and first aid kits is a laughable response to Putin's Sudetenland styled annexations and invasions.
Crimea and eastern Ukraine were Obama's special gift to Putin. Somehow Trump is getting flak for his Ukraine policy but I don't see Putin making any more land grabs like that since Trump was elected. That's a positive right?
Which would have been a great way to have hundreds of pieces of military hardware end up in Russian/Separatist hands.
The Ukrainian Armed Forces collapsed in the face of the Russian invasion, with thousands of Ukrainian troops defecting to the other side or deserting their posts entirely. Within a few months of the invasion the Ukrainians could muster just 6,000 troops, barely a brigade worth of troops. It wasn't until the summer of 2014 that they had assembled a patch work fighting force of national guard units and volunteer battalions (many of whom were of dubious loyalty to the Kiev government and several had to disbanded afterwards), and this force was routed almost immediately after they came under Russian attack.
No amount of military hardware can overcome a lack of skill and willing personnel. The Iraqis fielded an incredibly well armed force in 1991 and they fell apart in a few hours. The Saudis today field Abrams and Challengers and fly advanced western aircraft and they get routed by piss poor Houthi rebels. Give the Ukrainians the same amount of hardware and they will still fail. You cannot just buy your way into military competence.
Russian troops are invading Ukraine as we speak, and you’re pretending you don’t “See”?????????
“Somehow” Trump is getting flak for sending his tv lawyer and two Russian bag men, all financed by Moscow, to undermine Ukranian leadership by running some idiotic sidebar scheme to force Kiev to announce and investigation into a potential rival in a US election.
Whistling past the graveyard is a Trumpster specialty these days.
To be fair, you’ve had three years to practice.
And Trump’s behavior (which is not a policy) is designed to weaken Ukraine and destroy confidence in its ability to survive.
Providing Jericho missiles and other direct military aid weakens Ukraine?
Dang, the radical left views reality through the most bizarre filters known to man.
What Trump and Fox neglected to tell you is that there is a sales caveat that comes with the Javelins.....
Far From the Front Lines, Javelin Missiles Go Unused in Ukraine | Foreign Policy
They have to be in storage as far from the Donbas front lines as is possible. Stored in Lviv oblast. Any farther west and they would be in Poland.
How Donald Trump Is Making It Harder to End the War in Ukraine
President Volodmyr Zelenskyy.
One could easily argue that Donald Trump aided Vladimir Putin in a 'circuitous' fashion by temporarily withholding US Congressional defense funding for Ukraine, a nation at war with Putin's Russia.
Merely the impression of weak US presidential support strengthens Putin's position and weakens that of Zelenskyy. I believe Trump clearly understood this implication.
So now the spin is the military aid that was withheld to the peril of Ukraine, and requires the removal of the President from Office, is useless?
Who do you work for?
I never mentioned withheld aid. That's your weird spin above. Try again ocean.
We know who you work for ... the Gushing Over Putin party.
What Trump and Fox neglected to tell you is that there is a sales caveat that comes with the Javelins.....
Far From the Front Lines, Javelin Missiles Go Unused in Ukraine | Foreign Policy
They have to be in storage as far from the Donbas front lines as is possible. Stored in Lviv oblast. Any farther west and they would be in Poland.
Gen. Tod Wolters, the head of U.S. European Command, said Thursday at the Pentagon that Ukrainian soldiers welcomed the arrival of the first tranche of missiles, as well as U.S. and NATO training on how to use them.
“You see a little bit of a bounce in the step of a Ukrainian soldier when he or she has had the opportunity to embrace this system that allows them to better defend their turf,” Wolters said, noting that U.S. and NATO military teams traveled to Ukraine this summer to teach the armed forces there how to better use the new weapon.
While the Obama administration slapped sanctions on Moscow over its invasion of Ukraine and had provided Kyiv with substantial financial aid, the administration stopped short of providing lethal weapons to Ukraine—including the Javelins—due to fears that they could fall into Russia’s hands or prompt Moscow to escalate. Officials also worried that the untrained Ukrainian military would not be able to use sophisticated equipment such as the Javelins, said Jim Townsend, a former Defense Department official.
As the Ukrainian military gains experience, that is less of a concern, Wolters said.
U.S. and NATO training efforts over the last few years “allow us to have comfort that with an additional Javelin comes enough soldiers with the ability to embrace that capability, absorb it, and productively use it,” Wolters said, noting that his military advice would be to provide additional Javelins to Ukraine.
No you didn't mention aid. But you claimed the missiles are worthless given where it's claimed the missiles are to be stock piled.
So the equipment the President should be impeached over, are actually useless.
We know who you work for comrade.
Lol. You didn't even know where the Javelin's in Ukraine were mandated to be stored.
Neither Trumpov nor Fox told you that crucial part did they?
Has Ukraine been taken over by Russia? Did I miss something?
Under the conditions of the foreign military sale, the Trump administration stipulates that the Javelins must be stored in western Ukraine—hundreds of miles from the battlefield. “I see these more as symbolic weapons than anything else,” said Samuel Charap, a senior political scientist at Rand Corp. Experts say the conditions of the sale render them useless in the event of a sustained low-level assault—the kind of attack Ukraine is most likely to face from Russia.
The link you provided, even though no one ever heard of that blogger, shoots down your arguments:
Which would have been a great way to have hundreds of pieces of military hardware end up in Russian/Separatist hands.
The Ukrainian Armed Forces collapsed in the face of the Russian invasion, with thousands of Ukrainian troops defecting to the other side or deserting their posts entirely. Within a few months of the invasion the Ukrainians could muster just 6,000 troops, barely a brigade worth of troops. It wasn't until the summer of 2014 that they had assembled a patch work fighting force of national guard units and volunteer battalions (many of whom were of dubious loyalty to the Kiev government and several had to disbanded afterwards), and this force was routed almost immediately after they came under Russian attack.
No amount of military hardware can overcome a lack of skill and willing personnel. The Iraqis fielded an incredibly well armed force in 1991 and they fell apart in a few hours. The Saudis today field Abrams and Challengers and fly advanced western aircraft and they get routed by piss poor Houthi rebels. Give the Ukrainians the same amount of hardware and they will still fail. You cannot just buy your way into military competence.
Thankfully isolationists were not successful in claiming that military aid to British in 1940 was pointless (or to South Korea in 1950).
Rest assured, military equipment did change hands but that is the nature of war -
Second, the commitment to supply serious military hardware to Ukraine would have been deterrent even before it arrived. Between the spring takeover of the Crimea and the late summer to fall incursion of Russian mercenaries the contemplation of rearming the Ukraine army may have deterred Putin's aggression - rather, Obama chose the route of tepid protest and mild sanctions.
Third, had serious anti-armor weapons and self-propelled artillery arrived before the Ukraine offensive that nearly extinguished the mercenaries, the arrival of Russian regulars and tanks would have been greeted with a nasty shock...and perhaps too late to effect the outcome (which re-established the lost ground and expanded into new territory).
We shall never know because, per your rationale, Obama was too cautious and spineless.
I wonder how intimidated Putin was by all those blankets being lobbed at his tanks?
The The Obama & European Clown Show is what emboldened Putin from the start.
"The Donald" isn't my choice for making things much better either
Irrelevant to my point. No one said their situations were identical, what pointed out that the excuse to not provide military supplies to a country in need MERELY because it may not be effective or lost in combat is a dumb excuse - one that you seem unable to grasp.Completely different situations; England had the geographic isolation to deter invading forces and South Korean aid was augmented by American military forces.
And would have done nothing to help Ukraine. Indeed, the presence of American weapons in Separatist or Russian hands, just a year or so after a huge debate erupted in America over the possibility of American aid to Syrian rebels ending up in terrorist hands, would have been a huge problem to the United States.
The idea that Putin and the Kremlin, which threatened nuclear retaliation against the West should they intervene directly, would have been deterred just by the sheer presence of American and western military hardware is laughable.
Again, you are trying to push the idea that had the Ukrainians just had enough firepower, they would have been able to succeed in the late summer of 2014. This is again, incorrect; what doomed Ukraine's offensive to failure was a lack of skill, not hardware.
...The Obama administration was criticized for its refusal to provide lethal assistance to Ukraine, nevertheless it did provide more than $100 million in security assistance, as well as a significant amount of defense and military equipment. Many of the items that the Obama administration did provide were seen as critical to Ukraine's military. By March 2015, the US had committed more than $120 million in security assistance for Ukraine and had pledged an additional $75 million worth of equipment including UAVs, counter-mortar radars, night vision devices and medical supplies, according to the Pentagon's Defense Security Cooperation Agency. That assistance also included some 230 armored Humvee vehicles.
Part of the $250 million assistance package that the Trump administration announced (then froze and later unfroze) included many of the same items that were provided under Obama, including medical equipment, night vision gear and counter-artillery radar. The Trump administration did approve the provision of arms to Ukraine, including sniper rifles, rocket launchers and Javelin anti-tank missiles, something long sought by Kiev.
It's important to put the war in Ukraine into prospective. The Russian military operation in Crimea began in Feb, 2014. U.S. officials were concerned that providing the Javelins to Ukraine would escalate their conflict with Russia. Key allies, including Germany, were against sending weapons into the conflict zone. In July of the same year 2014, a Russian missile shot down a Malaysian Air civilian jetliner with a surface-to-air missile launched from pro-Russian separatist-controlled territory in Eastern Ukraine. All 283 passengers and 15 crew were killed.
Conspiracy theories were rampant with Russia putting out all kinds of disinformation which deflected the blame away from themselves. Putin blamed Ukraine for the disaster. ...
Irrelevant to my point. No one said their situations were identical, what pointed out that the excuse to not provide military supplies to a country in need MERELY because it may not be effective or lost in combat is a dumb excuse - one that you seem unable to grasp.
But as it turned out the west acted as he expected and hoped for, weak...hesitant...tepid. Would Putin have plunged ahead if confronted with an escalating arms race or robust US involvement, who knows? Could the prospective or actual loss of Russian tanks to, for example, Ukrainian Javelins have modified Putin's plans, who knows? But Putin is not a nuclear war threatening Khrushchev and even he realized that nuclear war (or starting a full scale conventional war) was never an option.
The bottom line is I am NOT basing my points on certitude.
in order to justify your policy you have to PROVE with 100 percent certainty that any aide would have been useless. If you can't (and no one can know that) then you're turning your back is a cold, calculated, and clearly pro-Russian aggression policy. Your cloaked point, sadly, is that Ukraine should not be even given the opportunity to check or turn the tables on the Russians (while you hypocritically beat on them for not being better when confronted by better equipped Russian regulars).
Given that you keep pushing a policy of self fulfilling defeat, why not fess up? Are you an alt-right Russophile or an old style anti-American leftist?
Trump is only echoing a John McCain quote aimed to criticize the Obama administration "The Ukrainians are being slaughtered and we're sending blankets and meals," In 2015, the late John McCain said "Blankets don't do well against Russian tanks." Trump is being hyperbolic here.
The Obama administration was criticized for its refusal to provide lethal assistance to Ukraine, nevertheless it did provide more than $100 million in security assistance, as well as a significant amount of defense and military equipment. Many of the items that the Obama administration did provide were seen as critical to Ukraine's military. By March 2015, the US had committed more than $120 million in security assistance for Ukraine and had pledged an additional $75 million worth of equipment including UAVs, counter-mortar radars, night vision devices and medical supplies, according to the Pentagon's Defense Security Cooperation Agency. That assistance also included some 230 armored Humvee vehicles.
Part of the $250 million assistance package that the Trump administration announced (then froze and later unfroze) included many of the same items that were provided under Obama, including medical equipment, night vision gear and counter-artillery radar. The Trump administration did approve the provision of arms to Ukraine, including sniper rifles, rocket launchers and Javelin anti-tank missiles, something long sought by Kiev.
It's important to put the war in Ukraine into prospective. The Russian military operation in Crimea began in Feb, 2014. U.S. officials were concerned that providing the Javelins to Ukraine would escalate their conflict with Russia. Key allies, including Germany, were against sending weapons into the conflict zone. In July of the same year 2014, a Russian missile shot down a Malaysian Air civilian jetliner with a surface-to-air missile launched from pro-Russian separatist-controlled territory in Eastern Ukraine. All 283 passengers and 15 crew were killed.
Conspiracy theories were rampant with Russia putting out all kinds of disinformation which deflected the blame away from themselves. Putin blamed Ukraine for the disaster. To this day, Russia has denied being responsible for the shooting down of Malaysian Air Flight 17. It's been a horrible time in Ukraine since they were invaded and they have paid a heavy price for their struggle to be an independent democracy, separate and apart from Russia.
I know what the Ukraine and Crimea is all about.
Absolutely nothing......................except for liberal Europeans allowing Putin to take what ever he likes. (one little piece at a time)
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?