• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The West shouldn’t back down in the face of Putin’s threats (1 Viewer)

Rogue Valley

Lead or get out of the way
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
96,308
Reaction score
85,478
Location
Barsoom
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The West shouldn’t back down in the face of Putin’s threats

President Volodymyr Zelensky, his Ukrainian warriors and his courageous people fight on. Against all odds, they defeated Vladimir Putin’s army in the Battle of Kyiv. But one inspiring victory does not win a war. They are now bracing for what promises to be an even larger Battle of the Donbas in eastern Ukraine, which Ukrainian officials believe could determine the outcome of the war. They still need help from the West — and the West must respond without caving to Russian threats. The Ukrainians don’t only need Soviet-era heavy weapons. They also need more modern and effective weapons from the West, even if soldiers would have to train for their use off the battlefield. As Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba has argued, “The more weapons we get, and the sooner they arrive in Ukraine, the more human lives will be saved.” He’s right. But Western leaders are still concerned about Russian threats of escalation. Western intelligence assessments say that delivering fighter jets, for example, will be unacceptable to Putin. Few in Washington, Berlin, Brussels or London want to escalate this war. This threat of escalation, however, is cheap talk. Putin is bluffing. He is deliberately allowing the U.S. intelligence community to discover data about escalation in order to scare us away from helping Ukrainians win.

Putin’s first bluff was his scariest. Several weeks ago, he threatened consequences “such as you have never seen in your entire history” against countries that interfered in Ukraine, and vowed to put Russia’s nuclear forces on high alert. We now know that these words were empty threats, described by NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg as “nuclear saber-rattling.” Russia has also been making non-nuclear threats. Deputy foreign minister Sergei Ryabkov similarly commented that Western armaments shipments to Kyiv were “not just a dangerous move” but turned “these convoys into legitimate military targets.” Yet here, too, there is little substance to the bluster. Russia’s army is struggling mightily in a war against a smaller and lesser-armed Ukrainian army. Under such circumstances, Putin is highly unlikely to attack the largest military alliance in the world, anchored by the most powerful military in the world, the United States. Putin is angry and unhinged, but not suicidal. A Ukrainian win or stalemate in that battle will make us and our NATO allies more secure. A loss will produce the opposite.


Putin cannot be allowed to "win". It's as simple as that.
 
Playing chicken with the two largest nuclear arsenals on Earth seems like a great idea, especially when one party thinks they're the world's police, judge, and executioner, and the other party feels cornered and might not be behaving as rationally as you and your reductive commentary.
 
Didn't work in Mariupol which has been reduced to rubble and surrounded. Look, I'm 100% in support of Ukraine, but they simply don't have the troops or materiel to do much more than they are already doing-postponing the inevitable.
Ukraine has broadly been able to defend themselves. It seems increasingly unlikely Russia can accomplish its military goals through traditional means. So the options for Russia at this point seems to be;
1 - humiliating defeat
2 - nuclear button

No country has any meaningful defense against nukes, so the best we can do is provide them the means to defend against traditional military methods. We are even giving them heavy artillery, airplanes, and APC now which is a pretty significant ramp up to give them the ability to go on the offensive and drive Russia out of Ukraine.
 
Ukraine has broadly been able to defend themselves. It seems increasingly unlikely Russia can accomplish its military goals through traditional means. So the options for Russia at this point seems to be;
1 - humiliating defeat
2 - nuclear button

No country has any meaningful defense against nukes, so the best we can do is provide them the means to defend against traditional military methods. We are even giving them heavy artillery, airplanes, and APC now which is a pretty significant ramp up to give them the ability to go on the offensive and drive Russia out of Ukraine.

Nowhere near 'the best we can do' has ever been done, and the intelligent path forward is always diplomacy, which progressive sources have said the conditions of are 90% agreed upon.
 
Ukraine has broadly been able to defend themselves. It seems increasingly unlikely Russia can accomplish its military goals through traditional means. So the options for Russia at this point seems to be;
1 - humiliating defeat
2 - nuclear button

No country has any meaningful defense against nukes, so the best we can do is provide them the means to defend against traditional military methods. We are even giving them heavy artillery, airplanes, and APC now which is a pretty significant ramp up to give them the ability to go on the offensive and drive Russia out of Ukraine.
Who is giving Ukraine aircraft, and how are they getting them there without flying them in?
 
Nowhere near 'the best we can do' has ever been done, and the intelligent path forward is always diplomacy, which progressive sources have said the conditions of are 90% agreed upon.
Ok. Well Ukraine has been having diplomatic talks with Russia this entire time. They want Russia to leave their country, Russia is insisting on continuing to invade. So there is something of an impasse there.

What is your proposed diplomatic solution?
 
Who is giving Ukraine aircraft, and how are they getting them there without flying them in?
It appears an official made a misleading statement. We only gave them parts and are planning on giving them helicopters.
Kyiv has repeatedly requested combat aircraft to help it repel invading Russian forces.

"I was in error in saying that, in past tense, they have been given whole aircraft. I regret the error," Kirby said on Wednesday.

"That said, the Ukrainians have received -- through United States' coordination and provision -- enough spare parts and additional equipment such that they have been able to put in operation more fixed-wing aircraft in their fleet than they had even two to three weeks ago."

The United States has announced plans to transfer Russian-made helicopters to Ukraine that had once been intended for Afghanistan.
 
Ok. Well Ukraine has been having diplomatic talks with Russia this entire time. They want Russia to leave their country, Russia is insisting on continuing to invade. So there is something of an impasse there.

What is your proposed diplomatic solution?
Diplomacy is always preferable to the alternative, no matter how long talks go on for.
 
Diplomacy is always preferable to the alternative, no matter how long talks go on for.
Of course. Russia should obviously stop trying to achieve their diplomatic goals by force, leave Ukraine, and negotiate with them directly.
 
Ok. Well Ukraine has been having diplomatic talks with Russia this entire time. They want Russia to leave their country, Russia is insisting on continuing to invade. So there is something of an impasse there.

What is your proposed diplomatic solution?



There will be a diplomatic solution when both sides are exhausted. Right now both Ukraine and Russia are still full of fight
 
The West shouldn’t back down in the face of Putin’s threats




Putin cannot be allowed to "win". It's as simple as that.
Rogue Valley:

I think that some NATO states will eventually enter into direct conflict with Russia in/over Ukraine and then that Russia will use WMDs in Ukraine in the hope that those NATO states' offensive actions will not be covered by Article 5 of the NATO Charter. I hope I am wrong, but that is where I think this is going. We are on the brink of a nuclear/biological/chemical Third World War in Europe, in my estimation.

I don't think the Western elites fully appreciate how far Mr. Putin is willing to go to secure his place in history, be it a famous or an infamous place. The leaders of the West are involved in a group-think feed-back cycle of discounting the very real threat which Russia presents to us all and has forgotten what a Soviet-style "Scorched Earth policy" could really mean when taken to its extreme limits. Bleed Russia into weakness but don't corner it and move to cut its throat of we will see an apocalypse soon.

Be well and stay alive.
Evilroddy.
 
I suppose the first step in my diplomatic solution as a commenter on low-level DP is for the US to shut the **** up, back and stay out of it because the US government has negative credibility.
 
Bleed Russia into weakness but don't corner it and move to cut its throat of we will see an apocalypse soon.
I think we have to communicate very publicly that if Russia stops invading Ukraine the sanctions will be lifted. I also oppose trying to force Russia to pay reparations as I fear that would create a post WWI Germany situation.
 
I suppose the first step in my diplomatic solution as a commenter on low-level DP is for the US to shut the **** up, back and stay out of it because the US government has negative credibility.
Ok but how does that help Ukraine and or what should Ukraine do?
 
Didn't work in Mariupol which has been reduced to rubble and surrounded. Look, I'm 100% in support of Ukraine, but they simply don't have the troops or materiel to do much more than they are already doing-postponing the inevitable.

The UA didn't have the West's weapons systems when Mariupol was encircled, and did not know when the invasion would commence. Russia held the element of surprise.

Jeeze. Try and be a little honest in your posts.
 
The UA didn't have the West's weapons systems when Mariupol was encircled, and did not know when the invasion would commence. Russia held the element of surprise.

Jeeze. Try and be a little honest in your posts.
Where's the dishonesty? I'm simply posting an opinion based in the facts as they are presented. Mariupol is surrounded and Putin has stated he won't send any more troops in, preferring to starve the population and the remnants of military defenders, into submission.
 
Your Mariupol example was dishonest. Of course you didn't mention Putin's Kyiv debacle.
Fact; Mariupol is surrounded and destroyed.
Fact; Putin stated he will blockade Mariupol rather than continue attacking the last remaining civilians and military in the steel works.
Fact; Putin's word means nothing. If you want a comment on Kiev, ask away.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom