DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Ukraine and Russia

Your first remark is way off, from my perspective. Perhaps it is the paradigm. I am looking at it from a US perspective whereas perhaps you are looking at it from a global perspective?

I think we just flat disagree on your second point. I think we need to cut spending, too, but I think we need to continue to spend in areas that are necessary. I also think we have a net increase in spending if Russia expands its borders, unless we want to flat out lose our standing in Europe. That's just a reality. I think perhaps you are shooting for an ideal world where weapons don't need to be made, and I am existing in what I see as the real world. Appeasement and backing down/away has never done well with ambitious dictators like Putin, and the costs in the end are more severe.

Putin's standing as "more than a petty dictator" - we'll call it - does imply the need for more action vs the petty dictators you mention. Tactically speaking, he has the resources and has shown before that he is willing to interfere with the very fabric of our democracy to achieve that goal. More than that, many politicians in our country, including an ex-President, along with widely-viewed media pundits have exemplified very concerning behavior when it comes to their behavior concerning Putin. He also only respects force. That has become a widely accepted notion. I think his ambitions in taking over Ukraine, destabilizing Europe, and his willingness to interfere with our democracy merit more than enough for us to act against him at the level we are doing in Ukraine.

I will go ahead and come out and say it. When it comes to "arms manufacturers" I hate them - at least their business people - more than anyone else on this board. Full stop. I think they are corrupt, conniving, greedy jerks. I do not think it is extending a deadlock. In fact, I think our inaction is extending a deadlock. I see it as us defending a burgeoning country's right of self-determination against an established and dangerous adversary. For that, unfortunately, we need weaponry.

I was thinking more human perspective than global, but aye.

I'm not sure where people are getting appeasement from.

It takes 1 bullet/needle/sudden drop to get rid of Putin. You don't need a fleet of fighter-bombers. I'm a firm believer in trying simple solutions before escalating to billion dollar ones.

I wish that were a viable solution but I don’t think it is with his security. Otherwise I’d love to see that. There are few people in this world who I hope to drop dead ASAP. He is one of them.

Forgot to add - appeasement goes to the concession route. Not pointing the finger at you, but you have looks like Tucker Carlson who wanted to interview him to get his perspective, and you have people like Orban and the new guy in Slovakia. You also have Trump talking about negotiating and conceding things like Ukrainian territory. That’s appeasement.

He's more likely to die if you try to kill him than if you're dropping bombs in Ukraine or near the border. Putin isn't there-- they're mainly just soldiers that wanted to serve their countries that are being used as cannon fodder.

For me the best course of reasoning is to blame the man who started it all rather than those who are trying to help protect a nation from an invading force.

Russia has about 100 million more people in it than Ukraine. Putin seems perfectly willing to use as many of them as it takes. I don't care how much equipment you give someone, eventually the numbers tell. The Spartans are no more. Why use an expensive strategy that seems destined to fail? Putin hasn't even used his best troops and equipment yet. He's wearing down the defenders with soldiers he doesn't mind losing and old equipment that should have been melted down for scrap (and essentially is being.) He clearly doesn't value human life.

Yes, attempts on Putin's life may fail. Yet, the scale of life risked in those attempts is much lower than what we're "casually" helping to see dead every day in the Ukraine. It only takes one chance to succeed.

If it's a choice between hundreds dying everyday for the indefinite future with those deaths having no real effect on Putin versus a few people potentially dying to actually address the root of the problem, I know which one seems like a better approach to me.

It's the same old story. Rich men rule the world while they keep the poor busy fighting each other.

The US needs to do everything they can to take Putin down without starting ww3. Same way we need to rid ourselves of Trump, without starting a civil war. Otherwise, this all just continues with new faces and little change for the good.

Instead of doing everything or throwing money at every problem, we need to actually diagnose the problems. Unfortunately, all too often it seems that it is those doing the diagnosing that are causing the problems or making them worse.

The only viable alternative at this point in time, besides extrapolating other seemingly unrealistic scenarios, is either to hand over Ukraine to Russia or not. We can all sit here and say, "Yeah but if they". But that's not the current reality.

Not backing Putin down from invading democracies would be a fatal flaw. Any idiot should be able to see that. Sure, caving might actually give him a face saving out for now, but he’d just go again as soon as he regroups and resupplies. Meanwhile, we turn our back on yet another ally and another democracy… smh, I can’t believe it’s even a debate.

And for those decrying the spending on a foreign war… Better off fighting Putin in Ukraine than in the streets of America, or all across Europe like Hitler. You can’t let a threat like Putin go unchecked. And you damn sure shouldn’t give him any kind of win.

I'm curious to see what your plan to take him out would be.

You need to put the bullets where the bad guys are, not where they send their patsies.

That's quite a generalized statement. How are we going to "put the bullets" in the Kremlin when Putin is there, where Putin is and make sure the job gets done? This isn't a suburban house in Pakistan kind of thing. Even that wasn't easy.

I don't have the military intelligence to formulate a specific plan. We should have people that do, though. If not for things like this, what do we even have the CIA and military operational specialists for?

I'd be trying to recruit assets from amongst the disenfranchised in Moscow. Get them Russian hardware. Provide them with intelligence on potential vulnerabilities in Putin's security. Maybe try to recruit someone Putin might trust enough to be able to lure him into the open. Maybe try to suborn a cook or secretary. There are a practically limitless amount of possibilities. Hard to know what might work without human intelligence/eyes on the ground.

It was intended for OCD, not as a plan.

Is Putin always in the Kremlin, though? He's not, but getting him out would be part of most plans.

Rather than start a new thread to address this I'll post it here which it seems to fit into at least to some extent. It's the total lack of ability to believe the U.S. will ever keep their word and be a long term ally.

We can go back much further than this but I'll just use a few examples from the not to distant past.

The deal we made to allow inspectors to look for WMD in Iraq. We actually pushed this deal in the U.N. forcing the hand of other countries to agree to this in order to see if Iraq actually had mass stockpiles of WMD. Hans Blix ran this search and made it plain he was given full and unfettered access to everywhere he wanted to inspect. None of that made any difference. The inspectors were told to withdraw from Iraq because we were attacking.

The same thing happened with the inspectors in Iran when it was decided to pull out from those inspections to help prevent Iran develop a nuclear weapon.

There are things such as The Trans-Pacific Partnership, The Paris Agreement, UNESCO, NAFTA, which BTW had existed for 25 years though presidents of both parties being in power, United Nations Human Rights Council and I won't even get into why that was done.

There are many, many more. But what we have shown the world is that we can't be counted on. That any deal made with America may only be good through the next election cycle if even that long. If you want a long term ally that will stay true to their deal, don't count on America. That's a very disturbing message to send to the rest of the globe.

I don't think Putin trusts anyone. The guy has someone gather his poop behind him after he takes a dump because he doesn't even want that being analyzed. Maybe we could recruit the poop guy???

I'm kidding of course, but it just goes to the point that it really is not an easy to deliver concept in any sense. Far from it. That can't be emphasized enough. The CIA and various intelligence agencies have a huge purview about them outside of assassinating foreign figures.

I like how some people really think we’re in an ammo crisis.

We have the ability to resupply at the snap of a finger.

How desperate is Putin that has to broker new diplomatic relations with freaking North Korea in order to import enough munitions to continue fighting?

I’m also loving the constant scare tactics right wingers employ with this BRICS nonsense.

South Africa, nice diversity hire there.

I've seen so much misinformation surrounding this topic that I don't even know where to begin. It's like whack-a-mole. Perhaps it's just that I'm closer to it than a lot of people are, but it astounds me.

Of course, its not easy. But not easy is a long ways from impossible. How easy or hard something is to do has little to do with the merit of that thing. Yes, there could be a high possibility of failure, and you'd have to very carefully try to mitigate that. But, an approach that will certainly end in thousands of deaths is a failure before it even starts.

I almost feel like I'm having an argument with the ghost of Stalin. "The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of a million is a statistic." Each of those people that you seem perfectly content to help kill or let die is a person. How little value some people seem to put on human lives continues to astound me. "Not my group, not my problem. Go kill each other over there. Here let me buy you some guns"-- How quintessentially "American." "We know an entire generation of your young men has been effectively wiped out, Ukraine, but here are some more weapons. Go stop Russia so we don't have to." (I got a little hyperbolic myself)

Spending millions is easy for our government. Unfortunately, actually solving problems is hard.

Who knows? Maybe the political posturing and $200M a day is cover for black ops going on behind the scenes. Incompetence and exploitation seems more likely, but I've got to remember that I don't know what I don't know.

And no one wants to associate with the poop guy. I'm kinda thinking honey pot might be the play. Then again as former Russian intelligence, Putin probably knows all about those.

I can't say I appreciate the comparison to Stalin. As I said before, I think not supporting Ukraine actually increases the amount of bloodshed and lets things drag out.

I think my overarching point in this is that what you are seeking is for all intents and purposes, impossible.

What you are proposing as it pertains to Ukraine won't lower the death count. It will only insure that those deaths will be suffered mainly by Ukranians who were invaded by Russia. It only insures that it will be Russia doing most of the killing and that the results will only increase the size of Putin's empire and embolden him to continue further.

I'm all for supporting Ukraine. I'd just like to do it in a way that doesn't feel like sitting on the sidelines watching their entire population get wiped out. Sending "aid" feels a bit too much like buying tickets. Buying a fancy stadium and sending high tech gear wouldn't help a football team decimated by injury. Why do you expect a similar approach to help a country that is literally getting decimated period?

Nothing is impossible. There are just degrees of difficulty.

And when the degree of difficulty would take longer to overcome than Ukraine can go it alone against Russia, the downfall of Ukraine to Putin would be the result.

This is easy for Putin or any other world dictator. All you have to do is wait America out. America's word is only as good as the next election cycle. It's only good until your cause in which they promised their long term support becomes a political battle between the two parties. At that point America will disappear like a thief in the night and desert you. America is not a dependable ally.

I'm not saying to pull support. I'm saying to figure out how to actually end the war. Sending equipment won't matter if Ukraine "can't field a team." Things are headed in that direction.

This is a horrific comparison. We may just be at an impasse because I can't logically marry up anything you're saying with how the situation actually is. Sending advanced weaponry is not like buying a ticket. If anything, we have everything to send them which could make them "win the football game," but we seem to be dragging it out or only sending enough to prolong the conflict.

If your strategy is to take out Putin to end the war, then we might as well shoot for lasting peace in the Middle East while we're at it.

What we do know is that Putin refuses to enter into any talks that would require him to withdraw from any of the territory he has gained in Crimea and Ukraine. As long as he controls the populace in Russia he has no motivation to change his stance. That too would only embolden Putin to continue down this same path in the future.

As I said before, he knows all he has to do is wait America out and the political landscape will cause the tide to turn and America will eventually abandon Ukraine. We are already beginning to watch a movement in that direction.

Putin know this.

It's more a metaphor than a comparison. It's trying to simplify an idea related to a complicated situation into something easier to understand. What do you think the situation actually is? What percentage of 18-30 year old males do you think are still alive in Ukraine? Having old ladies or children try to fly jets isn't going to work. Having 100 million less people put Ukraine at a disadvantage realistically "impossible" to overcome regardless of equipment.

Yes, We might as well shoot for peace in the Middle East, too. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. If you don't try to change things, they're not ever going to change. Total definition of insanity. Lets keep sending weapons and then wonder why people keep killing each other. Stop sending weapons, and put down the people that won't put the weapons down (preferably declare criminal and arrest, but sometimes criminals don't leave a choice.) Obviously we can't just stop at this point, but if we had "put Putin and those like him in his regime down," we wouldn't be here. If we can get rid of him, maybe we can stop the vicious cycle. Maybe not. But let's not even try because it won't be easy. smh.

Providing/making more weapons in the name of peace is a such a logical fallacy and/or counterproductive approach. Yes, its been a policy. No, it hasn't really worked. Its just trickled down and led to violent cultures and/or a proliferation of extremist groups that see violence as an answer.

I think we're on completely different wavelengths. I don't see this conversation becoming any more productive.

Indeed. Though, if productivity was a requirement for conversations, this would be a rather empty forum.

I won't argue with you there, although I won't call you Stalin.

I didn't call you Stalin. You just seemed to see the number of people that have died and will die in Ukraine as statistics more than the tragedy that they are, and that brought the quote to mind. The war seems abstract to you, I guess. Seeing wartorn bodies on TV is one thing, experiencing the sights, smells, and sounds in person another.

Now you're just jabbing and lying and/or making really stupid assumptions.

Let me just say I have done more to help the Ukrainians than you have. I am very confident in saying that. Like I said in a response to Swish before, I am closer to the effort than most. We've had a lot of people serve on here too, who have been in war zones, and they almost all unanimously support equipping Ukraine. You are the only person I know who thinks a mission to try and assassinate Putin is an achievable goal or even a pragmatic idea vs arming the Ukrainians. The fact is they see it fit to fight fiercely to defend their homeland against an unjustified, hegemonic invader who has thrown human rights out the window because they are a P5 member and strong enough to block any sort of rebuke, and they have a powerful partner. That takes away the whole "petty dictator" point as well.

Nothing about this war is abstract. Nothing at all. I would argue the people who don't arm the Ukrainians see it that way.

It seems that your tactic in these discussions is to perhaps act in obtuse ways for the purpose of seeming intelligent - my impression - but I cannot find one practical or thoughtful approach to what you think a solution is.

Feel free to have the last word. I'm done.

I don't know about all that. Not wanting people to die in a needless war is noble.

But everything after that (which is the meat of the debate) is, at the very least, incredibly short-sighted. Failing to arm Ukraine to adequately defend its sovereign borders (those same borders that act as a buffer between NATO and Russia) amounts to appeasement. Not being able to connect those dots or failing to grasp the impact kinda short-circuits any meaningful discussion.

I find it interesting that aid for Ukraine is one of the VERY few hot-button issues that's getting bipartisan support (read a headline the other day that McConnell and Schumer are working on pushing that despite the chaos in the House)... the struggle stems from our favorite fringe group.

You keep acting like I'm saying it's an either provide equipment or go for Putin situation. I'm saying we need to do both. Providing equipment isn't enough.

I'd prefer to try to shorten the war by any means necessary, rather than solely continue an approach that seems like it will only extend the war until all the Ukrainians are dead. Yes, we have to help the Ukrainians fight and not abandon them. I'd prefer to find a way to do it better and resolve the situation faster.

I don't get what is so hard to understand about that.

I may have injected too much of my perspective into your perspective and vice versa. I'm somewhat seeing how rather than not caring perhaps you are coming from a more emotionally involved personal perspective. You feel like you are personally doing something to help the situation (you are) and I'm trying to take that away from you (I'm not.) Doing what you are doing is good, I'm just not sure it's enough.

I see it kind of like this. If we were able to magically go back in time and give every Spartan an M16, the Persians still would probably have overrun them due to their overwhelming numbers. Yes, the Spartans may have held out longer and killed more Persians, but ultimately they would still have lost (with the net change only being more dead Persians, plus M16s lying around waiting to be used.) Now if Xerxes had been assassinated in addition to providing weapons, the Spartans may have held out while the Persians tore themselves apart with in fighting. Xerxes actually was assassinated by one of his bodyguards about a decade after Thermopylae. And the Achaemenid (Persian) Empire became more outwardly peaceful (internal assassinations kept happening) before itself being conquered by Alexander "the Great."

I would just inject that the overall tone of your message did not come across the way your latest, further explanation has since has accomplished. I believe you clarifying it helps clear up a lot of that.

And I will just say that I believe that possibly even more productive than actually "taking Putin out", winning over the people of Russia may be the best way to help things. I would find it more likely than not that America has been trying to accomplish that. However, before that could actually be accomplished I think the time frame of such an event would come far too late to be relative to what's going on in Ukraine.

I don't think the people of Russia need to be won over. I think most of the common people would gladly be rid of Putin already. They just need to be empowered to be able to actually do something other than protest in the streets and get arrested. To me, what they need is covert training and tactical support.