The "Support Ukraine" Calculus #1

[SkyChief]

The Ukrainian Air Force already has . . [many military aircraft]. . in inventory and all of those can be used "to attack Russia".

Or were you of the opinion that they would simply fall out of the air the moment that they crossed out over the Ukrainian border?

This is another straw-man argument. I never claimed (or implied) that Ukraine presently doesn't have any weapons that could be used to attack Russia.

The point is that President Biden recognizes why the U.S. (or any other NATO country) cannot supply Ukraine with offensive weapons. This is why Biden said NO to Poland supplying Ukraine with MiGs. The risk of escalating the conflict is too high. Biden must be rational and measured.

Biden screws up a lot of stuff, but his policy with supporting Ukraine is spot-on.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

This is another straw-man argument. I never claimed (or implied) that Ukraine presently doesn't have any weapons that could be used to attack Russia.

The point is that President Biden recognizes why the U.S. (or any other NATO country) cannot supply Ukraine with offensive weapons. This is why Biden said NO to Poland supplying Ukraine with MiGs. The risk of escalating the conflict is too high. Biden must be rational and measured.

Biden screws up a lot of stuff, but his policy with supporting Ukraine is spot-on.

I agree that Mr. Biden's POLICY of "supporting Ukraine" IS "spot-on".

Where the difficulties lie is in how that POLICY gets IMPLEMENTED.

AUTHORIZING the possible provision of $1,000,000,000 in aid is one thing - actually DELIVERING the aid is another.

You do realize that the likelihood of that assistance actually being delivered is directly related to the amount of the money that is spent in the United States of America in order to purchase American made supplies - don't you?

PS - If the Polish government wanted to stage the MiGs through an airport that was NOT controlled by the USAF (or any other NATO military airport) - exactly what would Mr. Biden be able to do to prevent it - impose crushing economic sanctions of the government of the country that allowed it to happen?

PPS - That being said, I have absolutely no qualms about (almost) any actions which are designed to prevent WWIII. Mind you, the "Munich Agreement" was 'designed to prevent WWII' and we all know how that one worked out. If the countries which suffered around 10,717,700 (and possibly as high as 30,000,000) total WWII deaths decided that giving Russia some of Ukraine was a "reasonable price" to pay to prevent WWIII why would the opinion of a country that suffered around 418,000 total WWII deaths matter to them?

 

[SkyChief]

PS - If the Polish government wanted to stage the MiGs through an airport that was NOT controlled by the USAF (or any other NATO military airport) - exactly what would Mr. Biden be able to do to prevent it - impose crushing economic sanctions of the government of the country that allowed it to happen?

As you know, Mr. Biden has tremendous influence in the decisions of NATO. If a NATO country did some action that could potentially put the other member nations at risk, then Biden would tell the NATO Supreme Allied Commander to impose sanctions on the rogue NATO state. He could also recommend that the rogue state be expelled from NATO. ( i don't pretend to understand the nuances of the NATO chain-of-Command, but you get the idea)

There are established rules in NATO that prevents one member state from going rogue, and putting the other NATO states in jeopardy.

PPS - That being said, I have absolutely no qualms about (almost) any actions which are designed to prevent WWIII. Mind you, the "Munich Agreement" was 'designed to prevent WWII' and we all know how that one worked out. If the countries which suffered around 10,717,700 (and possibly as high as 30,000,000) total WWII deaths decided that giving Russia some of Ukraine was a "reasonable price" to pay to prevent WWIII why would the opinion of a country that suffered around 418,000 total WWII deaths matter to them?

Again, there are punitive actions available for NATO to use against rogue member states including sanctions and expulsion.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

As you know, Mr. Biden has tremendous influence in the decisions of NATO.

Indeed, and so did Mr. Trump. The catch is in the definition of the word "influence".

If a NATO country did some action that could potentially put the other member nations at risk, then Biden would tell the NATO Supreme Allied Commander to impose sanctions on the rogue NATO state.

Did you know that the NATO military forces are NOT under the direction of the NATO Supreme Allied Commander, but rather are under the direction of the direction of the Military Committee (which is NATO's highest military authority [and which is composed of the Chiefs of Defence of all twenty-nine member countries]). The NATO Supreme Allied Commander (Europe) take direction from the Military Committee (and the President of the United States of America is NOT a member of the Military Committee).

He could also recommend that the rogue state be expelled from NATO.

Did you know that the NATO Charter does not contain any provision for "expelling" a member nation?

( i don't pretend to understand the nuances of the NATO chain-of-Command, but you get the idea)

In other words, your opinion is based on the fact that you believe that the President of the United States of America is the ruler of the entire (non-Communist) world and that every other country in the world has to comply with the merest whim of the President of the United States of America (or else be crushed economically [and militarily if need be]).

There are established rules in NATO that prevents one member state from going rogue, and putting the other NATO states in jeopardy.

Please cite those "rules" which prohibit a NATO member country going to the assistance of another country if the NATO member country believes that doing so is in its own best interests.

Again, there are punitive actions available for NATO to use against rogue member states including sanctions and expulsion.

Did you know that NATO is NOT a government?

Please identify where in

NATO Organization

Civilian structure​

Military structure​

Organisations and agencies​

you find the body which governs the CIVILIAN governments of NATO.

Did you know that it would be up to the individual governments of the NATO nations (and NOT whether or not to "impose sanctions"?

 

[SkyChief]

. . . In other words, your opinion is based on the fact that you believe that the President of the United States of America is the ruler of the entire (non-Communist) world and that every other country in the world has to comply with the merest whim of the President of the United States of America (or else be crushed economically [and militarily if need be]). . . .

Poland wanted to deploy all of their MiG-29 fighter jets to help Ukraine, which was a reckless decision and would have put other NATO states in jeopardy.

So Biden said NO.

That's what happened. Biden has sway in the NATO organization. That's my point.

. . . Please cite those "rules" which prohibit a NATO member country going to the assistance of another country if the NATO member country believes that doing so is in its own best interests. . . .

They can assist other NATO countries. As you know, Ukraine is not a NATO country.

. . . Did you know that it would be up to the individual governments of the NATO nations (and NOT whether or not to "impose sanctions"? . . .

I didn't know that. I stand corrected.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Poland wanted to deploy all of their MiG-29 fighter jets to help Ukraine, which was a reckless decision and would have put other NATO states in jeopardy.

So Biden said NO.

That's what happened.

Mr. Biden refused to allow USAF controlled property to be used for the transfer.

Biden has sway in the NATO organization. That's my point.

Of course he has "sway". That, however, does not mean that he is in sole and total control of the governments of every country that is a NATO member.

They can assist other NATO countries. As you know, Ukraine is not a NATO country.

Actually they are required to (read as "SHALL") assist other NATO countries if those other NATO countries are invaded.

They have the option to (read as "MAY") assist any other country if they believe that it is in their own best national interest to do so.

I didn't know that. I stand corrected.

Now if only you would learn the differences between

[1] "shall" and "may";​

​

[2] "influence" and "control";​

​

[3] "political" and "military";​

​

and​

​

[4] "what I remember from the week in High School when we learned all about the history and current events in the rest of the world outside of the United States of America (as if that were important to anyone)" and "reality".​

PS - Not only does the NATO Charter NOT prohibit NATO member nations from going to the assistance of other (non-NATO) countries, it doesn't prohibit NATO countries from invading and conquering other (non-NATO) countries. Nor, for that matter, does the UN Charter prohibit UN member countries from going to war with each other.

 

[SkyChief]

Mr. Biden refused to allow USAF controlled property to be used for the transfer.

Of course he has "sway". That, however, does not mean that [Biden] is in sole and total control of the governments of every country that is a NATO member.

Straw man. The fact is that Biden calls the shots because the U.S. is the most powerful NATO member. Of course the American president - no matter who it is will be the shot caller. Recall how Trump scolded the deadbeat Europeans for not paying their fair share towards NATO.

They pissed and moaned, but ultimately they yielded to Trump's demands. The U.S. president will always be the "Big Man On Campus" with NATO. (Even if it's a woman).

PS - Not only does the NATO Charter NOT prohibit NATO member nations from going to the assistance of other (non-NATO) countries, it doesn't prohibit NATO countries from invading and conquering other (non-NATO) countries. Nor, for that matter, does the UN Charter prohibit UN member countries from going to war with each other.

Let's not conflate NATO with the U.N. - - they are very different entities with very different goals.

Russia is a member of the U.N. Russia will NEVER be a member of NATO since NATO's primary function is to stymie Russian expansion.

 

[mrdeltoid]

And the actual condition of the "great American experiment" is more easy to discern if you are NOT caught up in the middle of trying to defend its original and ongoing perfection.

When I was younger, especially in my marine corps days, I would've held the D.O.C. in almost the same esteem as I do the bible, ready to fight to the death to defend. Although I still believe that all men are created equal, it's starting to look like a place where all races, religions, and ethnicities can self govern and peacefully coexist is pie in the sky.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Straw man. The fact is that Biden calls the shots because the U.S. is the most powerful NATO member. Of course the American president - no matter who it is will be the shot caller. Recall how Trump scolded the deadbeat Europeans for not paying their fair share towards NATO.

They pissed and moaned, but ultimately they yielded to Trump's demands. The U.S. president will always be the "Big Man On Campus" with NATO. (Even if it's a woman).

Considering that the US is NOT paying its fair share of the actual NATO expenses, that was, indeed, quite an accommodation.

Let's not conflate NATO with the U.N. - - they are very different entities with very different goals.

Which somehow contradicts the fact that the NATO Charter contains NO provision for expelling a member nation? How?

Russia is a member of the U.N. Russia will NEVER be a member of NATO since NATO's primary function is to stymie Russian expansion.

Any your point is - what?

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

When I was younger, especially in my marine corps days, I would've held the D.O.C. in almost the same esteem as I do the bible, ready to fight to the death to defend. Although I still believe that all men are created equal, it's starting to look like a place where all races, religions, and ethnicities can self govern and peacefully coexist is pie in the sky.

"Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp,. Or what's a heaven for?" - Andrea del Sarto - Robert Browning

 

[SkyChief]

Recall how Trump scolded the deadbeat Europeans for not paying their fair share towards NATO. They pissed and moaned, but ultimately they yielded to Trump's demands. The U.S. president will always be the "Big Man On Campus" with NATO. (Even if it's a woman).

Considering that the US is NOT paying its fair share of the actual NATO expenses, that was, indeed, quite an accommodation.

Nonsense. US and Germany are the backbone of NATO. If US or Germany were to leave NATO, then each remaining member state would need to double their respective contributions for NATO to maintain the current level of military strength/viability.

According to the 2021 estimates, U.S. defense spending will be close to $811 billion this year. On the other hand, the defense spending of all other NATO countries combined is projected to be $363 billion, meaning the U.S. will outspend all other countries by a whopping $448 billion.

NATO Cost Share Arrangements

U.S.

16.36%

Germany

16.36%

U.K.

11.29%

France

10.50%

Italy

8.79%

Canada

6.88%

Canada

6.88%

Turkey

4.73%

Netherlands

3.45%

Poland

2.99%

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Nonsense. US and Germany are the backbone of NATO. If US or Germany were to leave NATO, then each remaining member state would need to double their respective contributions for NATO to maintain the current level of military strength/viability.

The cost sharing is according to the formula dictated by the government of the United States of America. If you don't like playing by the rules that you created, I really don't want to hear you whining about it.

Strangely enough, the odds on Germany "leaving NATO" are about as close to 0% as you can possibly get. If the US pulled out of NATO, the number of actual combat personnel and actual combat equipment actually in Europe would hardly be affected at all (the total strength would drop by about 3.93%).

According to the 2021 estimates, U.S. defense spending will be close to $811 billion this year. On the other hand, the defense spending of all other NATO countries combined is projected to be $363 billion, meaning the U.S. will outspend all other countries by a whopping $448 billion.

NATO Cost Share Arrangements

U.S.

16.36%

Germany

16.36%

U.K.

11.29%

France

10.50%

Italy

8.79%

Canada

6.88%

Canada

6.88%

Turkey

4.73%

Netherlands

3.45%

Poland

2.99%

Indeed, and it is really wonderful to see that the US is spending $811 Bn on NATO and not a dime elsewhere.