DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Ukraine and Russia Cont.

If anyone here thinks it’s too expensive to back our Allies. You’re going to be shocked at the price if we don’t.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/12/19/russia-ukraine-war-list-of-key-events-day-664


I haven't really heard much great news about the much-hyped counteroffensive that took place this past spring/summer. It started off slowly, but sounded like Russia had dug in really well and gains were hard to come by. This is turning into a war of attrition, and that's bad news for Ukraine. They are going to need another gamechanger (jets?) in order to break any sort of stalemate and post gains.

The dip in reporting since the beginning of the Israeli conflict does them no favors. Republicans can block Ukrainian aid packages with little accountability (not that they had any before).

Well with the rabble in congress currently, Ukraine is getting let down and belittled for being a GREAT democracy and ally.

It’s beyond shameful. JD Vance has said some very stupid and awful things about it lately as well. Makes me nauseous he got elected.

I haven’t written much on this issue because it really pisses me off. I am not a fan of how this administration has supported this war. We have given millions upon millions of money and weapons that are defensive in nature. This administration is setting up Ukraine to be stuck in a quagmire. If you think it’s our responsibility to defeat Putin then you need to arm the Ukraine with weapons that will force Putin to defend his war at home as well.

I remember back in the day when I served Republicans were all for sending strong messages to the USSR. Democrats were scared to death of a possible nuclear war and fought hard against most of what our Republican presidents tried to do. Now things are reversed and I have a hard time believing the Republicans as a whole in Congress are objecting for anything other than to obstruct. I do think many conservatives are worried about the money being spent and how it is being used. For that they get called Putin lovers.

I think it’s a fair ask to seek more transparency into the funding, but I also think most R’s like Vance, either blatantly lie about how the funding is used, or just use that line as an excuse to obstruct.

I also think we need to do more to arm Ukraine. I don’t think a lot of people understand how important it is for them to stick it to Russia. The problem on that front is that the administration really can’t do more because of the obstruction.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europ...n-landing-ship-military-says-2024-02-14/

Ukraine has (allegedly) scored another major naval kill.

If GOPers get up off their brains and pass an aid package they might pull out the win. But those Putin/Trump bros just can’t take a shot at their idols.

They’ve turned Reagan in his grave so many times his skeleton is twisted up like a used silly straw or bread tie.

I almost completely agree, but given the ratio of people who passed in the Senate, it is almost completely a House Republican issue. Reagan would absolutely be turning in his grave on this matter.

Trumpworld takes aim at Republicans who supported Ukraine aid push

Senate Republicans who voted to advance aid for Ukraine last week are taking heavy incoming from allies of former President Trump, who are calling them out publicly and threatening primary challenges after they defied Trump’s calls to oppose the package.

Donald Trump Jr., the ex-president’s eldest son, has led the charge against the 22 Republicans who backed the national security supplemental, many of whom are allies of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).

He called for Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) to get a primary challenge, and for West Virginia primary voters to reject the gubernatorial bid of Moore Capito, the son of Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.).

In another instance, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) a major backer of Trump, took aim at Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), one of McConnell’s top allies, writing on social media, “Unbelievable that [Cornyn] would stay up all night to defend other countries borders, but not America.”

While some believe the Capito gubernatorial threat, in particular, was a low blow, the frustration from Trump’s orbit is palpable and is laying bare the fissures between it and GOP leadership.

“The last month exposed the problems that come with a GOP leadership team that has no relationships with the likely Republican nominee for president,” one Senate GOP aide said. “It further exposes the disconnect between Republican lawmakers largely in D.C. compared to where our voters are.”

The security bill includes $60 billion in military and economic assistance for Ukraine and $14 billion for Israel, along with monies for the Indo-Pacific region and humanitarian purposes.

On top of the Ernst and Capito remarks, Trump Jr. also took aim at Cornyn and Senate Minority Whip John Thune (R-S.D.) — two of the leading contenders to eventually replace McConnell — over their Ukraine aid votes.

But whether the barbs will have much impact is an open question, strategists and aides across the GOP spectrum say.

They are quick to note that being, or not being, in the good graces of the former president is always a fluid situation that can be changed in short order, for better or for worse.

“Trumpworld has a short memory if you get on board,” the Senate GOP aide said.

They also note the insular nature of the Senate, with leadership elections and votes for various bills, including Ukraine aid, rarely determined from outside of the chamber.

“The Senate is notoriously immune from pressure from the outside, and the harder they push the less likely they are to get what they want. The United States Senate is very similar to former President Trump in that way,” one GOP operative told The Hill. “The outside game never works with the Senate.”

Despite Trump’s power and heft with the GOP base, even his voice has limitations sometimes.

For example, Trump and his allies came up empty in the 2022 cycle to recruit a challenger to Thune after he said the 2020 electoral count would go down like a “shot dog.”

The No. 2 Senate Republican ultimately won reelection by 43 points — a larger margin of victory than South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem (R), a top Trump ally, raked in that year.

Nevertheless, Republicans are taking notice of the threats, with Ernst atop that list.

Trump Jr. also floated Matthew Whitaker, a top Trump backer who served as acting attorney general briefly before William Barr took over the post, to challenge her.

While the Republicans note that one vote — especially aid to Ukraine — likely wouldn’t be enough to bring a member down, it could be a piece to a puzzle.

“One individual vote rarely ends a Senate career, but … what happens when it’s connected to a broader theme is the problem,” a second GOP operative said. “For [Ernst], if you’re within the [Trump] inner circle right now, this is the lady who was with Nikki Haley the night before the [Iowa caucuses], and then she’s doing this; and is she supportive of him? That’s the bigger picture within Trumpworld.”

Despite her appearance with Haley, Ernst remained officially neutral through the caucuses and has declined to weigh in with a primary endorsement since.

Half of Senate GOP leadership has endorsed Trump thus far, including Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), who backed him ahead of Iowa, and Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.), who did so early last year. Sen. Capito endorsed the ex-president in late January.

As for Trump, he has not added his two cents to his eldest son’s remarks. His social media posts reiterated calls for lawmakers to oppose the security spending package and have taken aim at NATO countries he says have not lived up to their obligations. Some of his supporters have also followed his lead and called for the funds to be given as a loan rather than a grant.

The battle over Ukraine funding ratcheted up again Friday after Alexei Navalny, the Russian opposition leader and President Vladimir Putin’s preeminent foe, died in a Russian penal colony, raising more questions about the future of that possible aid to Kyiv.

Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said is not expected to bring the Senate bill as is up in the House, with a group of bipartisan lawmakers crafting a smaller, more targeted bill instead for possible consideration.

But in a statement reacting to Navalny’s death, he said that while Congress “debates the best path forward to support Ukraine,” the U.S. and its partners “must be using every means available to cut off Putin’s ability to fund his unprovoked war in Ukraine.”

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate...H-zK0VqjgFn9HEmLa1uFQtL2Nr0pPs3tqwDXALq8

Those trumpian supporters of Putin are growing even louder. Well done comrades. Putin thanks you for your support in his takeover of Ukraine.

I was curious so did a quick look. If these numbers aren't right let me know.

US aid to ukraine. About $125B.
Rest of Nato $178B

Nato members are now averaging 2% of their gdp as their contribution as required

By comparison. Cost of the war in Afghanistan .... $2.2 Trillion

I cant actually think of a good reason not to keep funding ukraine. Its money better spent than our own military spending.

Exactly! We spend gobs of money in our defense budget every year to counter Russia and now that we’re actually delivering aid to a proxy who is kicking their butts with it, all of a sudden it’s “We can’t do that!” It makes no sense objectively.

Also, people like Vance have painted a horribly false narrative. We’re not sending Ukraine suitcases of money. We spend the money here on things like materiel and then THAT stuff is what gets sent to Ukraine.

And weren't the high-dollar items (like the tanks) at the end of their lives and going to be replaced by newer revisions anyway?

jc

Imagine threatening a nuclear strike if you lose the war in Ukraine. not that Russian territory got invaded, but that you lost territory in ukraine you tried to annexed.

this is why no country has taken Russia's threats of nuclear strikes seriously. the moment its a tool used for non-defensive purposes, everybody knows you won't launch one.

Yup. Oddly enough, we have been making tanks for kind of no reason for a bunch of years. Basically, keep the production going in case we need them. But now it’s “we can’t give those away!”

Yes, they are meeting their requirements. But that doesn't matter to trump. His zombies believe every word he says. And if for some reason they couldn't meet their requirements? Not only would trump not defend them...... he would encourage Russia to do “whatever the hell they want” to any NATO member country. So much for their false claim that he 's "tough on Russia".

The guy who can't even identify all three branches of Government imparts more wisdom on us.

Just one more brick...

GOP Sen. Tommy Tuberville at CPAC: “I haven’t voted for any money to go to Ukraine because I know they can’t win.”
The Recount
Thu, February 22, 2024 at 7:25 AM CST·1 min read



While speaking at CPAC Thursday, Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) repeatedly said Ukraine “can’t win” Russia’s war against the country.

“We’re the one that forced this war, because we kept forcing NATO on Ukraine and showing Russia, hey, we’re going to build military bases on your borders. And Putin said, no, no, you’re not going to do that,” Tuberville said at the conservative conference in the D.C. area.

“I haven’t voted for any money to go to Ukraine because I know they can’t win,” the Republican senator continued.

“You hate that they’ve had 300,000 or 400,000 people killed, so — Russians also. You hate that we supported this. We’re pushing them out in front of the guns or out in front of the bus, I guess you’d speak. It’s an atrocity, but they can’t win,” Tuberville added.

Tuberville also later added that “Donald Trump will stop [the war] when he first gets in.”

“He knows there’s no winning for Ukraine. He can work a deal with Putin,” he said.

By the way, that last quote doesn't exactly inspire the "strong leadership" one person asserted in another thread...

No matter how they twist it, delivering Ukraine to Putin is not some noble cause.

Biden administration imposes sanctions aimed at Russia on more than 500 targets for Navalny death and ongoing war in Ukraine



The Biden administration imposed a fresh slate of sanctions on more than 500 targets on Friday in response to the death of Russian opposition figure and outspoken Kremlin critic Alexey Navalny and Moscow’s ongoing invasion of Ukraine.

The sanctions on the eve of Russia’s two-year war in Ukraine mark the latest move by the administration to levy consequences against Russia amid heightened tensions between the two countries. Friday’s announcement is the largest single day tranche of sanctions since Russian President Vladimir Putin began his war against Ukraine two years ago and is part of the administration’s ongoing efforts to limit the Kremlin’s revenues and hamper Moscow’s ability to source materials for its war.

Speaking from the White House on Friday, President Joe Biden said he imposed the sanctions “in response to Putin’s brutal war of conquest, and in response to Alexey Navalny’s death.”

“Because make no mistake,” Biden added, “Putin is responsible for Alexey’s death.”

Biden on Thursday met with Navalny’s widow and daughter in California. During their meeting, Biden said Friday, he “assured them his legacy will continue to live around the world, and we in the United States are going to continue to ensure that Putin pays a price for his aggression abroad and repression at home.”

The US Treasury Department sanctions prohibit targeted entities from accessing US-based assets, using the US dollar and financial systems, and participating in transactions that involve American citizens or businesses.

In addition to sanctions imposed by the US Treasury and State Departments, the administration also announced trade restrictions against more than 90 entities through the Department of Commerce.

Among those targeted are three Russian prison officials connected to Navalny.

The State Department sanctions hit Valeriy Gennadevich Boyarinev, the deputy director of the Federal Penitentiary Service, which has oversight of the penal colony where the opposition figure died, who “reportedly instructed prison staff to exert harsher treatment on … Navalny while he was in detention,” according to a State Department face sheet.

“Following Navalny’s death, Boyarinev was promoted to ‘Colonel General’ by decree of Vladimir Putin,” the fact sheet said.

They also target Igor Borisovich Rakitin, “the overall head of the Federal Penitentiary Service of1322 Russia for the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Region, in which Penal Colony IK-3 is located,” and Vadim Konstantinovich Kalinin, the prison warden. IK-3, nicknamed “Polar Wolf,” is where Navalny was imprisoned immediately before his death.

The sanctions package released Friday doesn’t directly sanction Putin. He is already sanctioned, according to a Treasury official.

The US, along with other Western governments, has levied a series of sanctions against Russia in recent years, but Russia has adapted to them. Putin has taken to gloating about Russia’s resistance to international sanctions, which take time to have an effect.

US officials have acknowledged the importance of adjusting Western sanctions to keep up the pressure – from ramping up enforcement of the price cap on Russian oil to targeting companies and financial institutions helping Russia evade sanctions – and remain confident that in the long run the Kremlin’s effort to successfully reorient its economy and trade will fail.

Biden has repeatedly condemned Putin and called him “a crazy SOB” in a fundraiser in San Francisco, according to the pool reporters traveling with the US president. The Kremlin, in response, said Biden’s comments were a “huge disgrace” for the United States.

Earlier this week, US national security adviser Jake Sullivan described the package as “another turn of the crank” after withering Western sanctions on Moscow since the start of the Ukraine war. While those sanctions have hampered Russia’s economy, they haven’t deterred Putin from proceeding with the invasion.

US Deputy Treasury Secretary Wally Adeyemo told CNN in a call with reporters Thursday that Friday’s package illustrates the United States’ increasing focus on sanctioning companies in third-party countries that are providing materials and key supplies for Russia’s war effort.

“We’re going after the key nodes in the Russian economy that are purchasing a number of these goods from companies in third countries,” he said. “So, our strategy more and more is making it harder for Russia to use the supply chain to build the weapons that they need. And we’re gonna be continuing to do that because our goal has to be to use the tools at Treasury and the Commerce Department to put sand in the gears of Russia’s military industrialized complex.”

“Russia is mortgaging their future in order to pay for the war that they want in their present,” Adeyemo said, adding later: “Putin thinks he can outsmart us and outlast us by turning inward, but Russia’s wartime transformation allows us to target densely concentrated production in a new and efficient way. With such a vertical integration we can hit the entire supply chain.”

In total, the Treasury Department on Friday sanctioned hundreds of entities involved in Russia’s military-industrial base, 26 third-country entities facilitating Russian sanctions evasion, and the operator of the Mir National Payment System – which the US government describes as a “major cog” in Russia’s financial infrastructure. Some of the third-party entities sanctioned Friday include firms in China, Serbia and the United Arab Emirates.

“This solemn anniversary and Aleksey Navalny’s death in Russian custody are stark and tragic reminders of Putin’s brazen disregard for human life, from Ukrainians suffering the costs of his unprovoked war to people across Russia who dare to expose the corrupt abuses that fuel his regime,” Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said in a statement.

In addition to Treasury’s actions, the US State Department on Friday imposed sanctions against those helping support Russia’s energy sector, waging its war against Ukraine, and facilitating sanctions evasion.

US officials had been working on a new sanctions package on Russia ahead of Navalny’s death and supplemented them in the wake of the opposition leader’s death, according to a senior US official, who added that US officials coordinated with European partners on the new package.

The EU and the United Kingdom are both expected to announce their own sanctions packages ahead of the two year anniversary of Russia’s invasion.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/23/poli...mUdZd7jwoh0cHqVlfMg6qEZeQjlyvu0yVXctHdaE

While the message the GOP is sending to Putin is to do “whatever the hell they want”.

I just want to address those we've seen in other threads that say Ukraine has no chance. I want to challenge the GOP mouthpieces that claim sending support to Ukraine only increases the death of their people in a war they can not win. That the only way to end this war is to negotiate with Putin. You can tell those that haven't learned from history. Even those who haven't learned anything from their own countries history. So lest they forget.........

Our nation was founded on the notion that we wanted to be free form foreign oppression. That we wanted to be able to elect a government and govern ourselves. No different than the people of Ukraine except Ukraine had already accomplished those things until Russia attacked them in an effort to stop it. But at that point in history we had nothing more than a bare bones military with rag tag forces, little munitions, while the empire of Great Britain was one of the strongest, greatest military forces in the world. Without support from somewhere we stood little chance. It was a situation not much different than the one Ukraine faces today.

But there was another military power, France, who realized that supporting us in the fight against their own enemy helped them. They supported us by providing supplies, arms and ammunition, uniforms, troops and naval support to the beleaguered Continental Army. The French navy transported reinforcements, fought off a British fleet, and protected Washington's forces in Virginia.

Now it's true we aren't supporting them with troops, however much like France we have been helping give them the means to fight off Russia in much the same way France supported us. Without France we had little chance of defeating Great Britain. And as much as some belittle France these days, without them the odds are we would have remained under British rule for God knows how much longer.

That's why it's so critical to continue supporting Ukraine. For our own nation owes a debt of gratitude for the support France gave to us which without that support there may have never been a United States of America. History is a wonderful thing when one is willing to learn from it.

trump and the Republicans have fresh Ukrainian blood on thier hands. That is a fact. Given them the money. Every day without it is more preventable Ukrainian deaths. Their priority is a vacation. How do they live with themselves?

You and Pit both hit the nail on the head.

I’ve said it before. If people think it’s too expensive to support Ukraine, just wait and see the price we’ll pay if we don’t.

We should send Z the house MAGA zealots for cannon fodder.

I would just like to add some context to the statement you're making, if Russia wins. Some might need to pull out a map.

So, if Russia takes over Ukraine, they will have a land bridge to take over Moldova. There is already a separatist faction in Moldova that is pro-Russian and anti-Moldovian. So if that happens, Romania, who is a true NATO ally is surrounded by Ukraine, and Moldova, now Russian occupied (in this scenario), and Serbia, who is Russian friendly. On top of that, Russia now has a land border between occupied Ukraine and Slovakia and Hungary which are both EU and NATO members who now have pro-Russian autocratic Governments. Read: infiltration.

On top of that, Russia now occupies almost the entire eastern border of Poland with Belarus, a Russian vassal, and occupied Ukraine. Slovakia occupies a substantial portion of the southern border. Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia are almost completely surrounded as of now, by Russia, Belarus and Kaliningrad.

If anyone can see this and show me how this leads to less investment toward NATO maintaining its prowess over Europe, please do so.

I'm all ears. Let's try to be objective.

Trump didn’t give them talking points to battle facts bro. Don’t hold your breath.

NATO should have inducted Ukraine under their umbrella years ago. Hindsight is 20/20.

You're asking someone to look at things big picture rather than from a micro perspective. I wish you luck with that.

Actually the price we’ll pay will be the massive number of lives we’ll loose.

If we stand idly by and permit Russia to take over Ukraine the odds of that happening are greatly increased.

Ukraine's top spy chief says Alexei Navalny 'died from a blood clot' amid claims that jailed Putin critic was murdered by Russian spies
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...says-Alexei-Navalny-died-blood-clot.html

Putin had him poisoned by Russian spies. He had well documented after effects of that poison. I’m pretty sure he wouldn’t be dead now if Putin hadn’t poisoned him, and later threw him in prison. Putin is a cold blooded killer. But it doesn’t surprise me that GOPers are constantly excusing away the crimes of their leaders.

I don't think he's making that accusation, but I will say it doesn't really matter how he died. Putin is the proximate cause. I mean, you throw the guy in prison on trumped up charges and then he ends up in solitary in Siberia and dies...yeah...I think we know who's solely responsible for the death, no matter what.

Poison is always seemingly the way it goes down with these guys. He attempted before on Navalny IIRC.

‘An unlikely reason for a natural death’ Russian state media says a blood clot killed Navalny. His doctor says there’s no way of knowing without an independent autopsy.

On February 16, Russian prison officials reported that opposition politician Alexey Navalny had died in a penal colony in the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug. Navalny’s associates have yet to independently confirm these reports. Navalny’s lawyer, Leonid Solovyov, said that he last visited his client on February 14 and that he was doing fine at that time. To find out more about the recent state of Navalny’s health, Meduza spoke to Alexander Polupan, one of the doctors who treated the opposition leader following his poisoning in 2020 and then continued to advise his associates on a regular basis.

When reached by Meduza following reports of Alexey Navalny’s death on February 16, Alexander Polupan said that he had “no exclusive information” about the recent state of the opposition politician’s health. “I don’t know anything his team doesn’t know,” the doctor said.

Earlier in the day, Russian prison authorities had reported that Navalny “felt unwell after a walk and almost immediately lost consciousness,” and then could not be resuscitated. “Emergency medical personnel confirmed the death of the convict. The cause of death is being established,” they said in a statement. Russia propaganda network RT then claimed that Navalny had died of a “detached blood clot.”

Polupan said that he wasn’t aware of any “fundamental or critical deterioration” in Navalny’s health. He also questioned the cause of death reported by Russian state media. “Clearly, his health [was generally] poor, as would be the case with any person who is placed in such conditions. But it somehow seems to me that this is an unlikely reason for a natural death,” he told Meduza. “They could have said ‘sudden cardiac arrest’ but only an autopsy can show a thromboembolism. There are no other methods.”

According to the doctor, Navalny did not have any underlying conditions that would put him at risk of a thromboembolism (this is the medical term for the obstruction of an artery by a dislodged blood clot). “He had problems with his spine some time ago, but they were absolutely not life-threatening, they only caused [him] discomfort,” he recalled. “He also had pneumonia a long time ago. But, I’ll repeat, he had no acute [health] problems lately.”

“He had neuropathy from the Novichok poisoning, but that’s typical for such poisoning [cases],” he added.

Asked if a blood clot could be used as a cover-up for murder, Polupan emphasized the importance of an independent autopsy. “If an honest autopsy is performed, the blood clot should be visible. A diagnosis of a thromboembolism cannot be made without the detached blood clot being found,” the doctor underscored. “But they [the Russian authorities] can do whatever they want — [they can] falsify the autopsy report and no one will be able to verify anything.”

https://meduza.io/en/feature/2024/02/16/an-unlikely-reason-for-a-natural-death

And as we know, there has been no independent autopsy.

If Nato does not want this to happen, I feel they need to do more than give money/supplies. It feels like countries think they can throw money at the problem and it will go away. Ukraine is losing the attrition war.

As Russia makes gains, Ukraine needs more soldiers. But expanding the draft is controversial

Last year in one of the Ukraine threads someone brought this up and the liberals on this board roasted him for having such a thought. Point remains, Russia has more bodies to throw at this than Ukraine does. Giving Ukraine tanks isn't going to do any good if they have no one to operate them. If they don't want Ukraine to fall, I feel sooner or later NATO will have to escalate this.

I don’t recall what you’re talking about or what the “liberals” said.

I do agree that more needs to be given to them, but withholding aid as we are doing right now, has the opposite effect of escalation, as we are currently seeing.

Plus, a lot of the materiel and things Ukraine requires does not demand excessive or much manpower at all.

Sure, Russia wave attacks. They take on massive casualties. That has been their thing since WW2 when they set up 2 lines. One to charge and one to shoot the first line if they retreat. That’s why they ended up with 3-4x the number of casualties as Germany.

Manpower is a factor in beating that, sure. But there are a lot more factors at play. We have, relatively speaking, been so lopsided in our casualty numbers vs the countries we combat against because of our materiel asymmetry.

But yes I do agree more needs to be done. NATO needs to step up. Germany withholding things like the Taurus is straight dumb. But that doesn’t negate our own stupidity.

Also, I just wanted to correct a mischaracterization you mentioned, which has become a Republican (read Vance) talking point. It is not throwing money at the problem. It is throwing supplies and materiel at the problem, which is what Ukraine is asking us for.

They haven’t asked for more troops, although I’m sure they wouldn’t mind.

I understand your point, but supplies and materials is money. Raytheon isn't going to donate their stuff. Farmers aren't going to donate their oats or soybeans for free.

Cost and money are pretty much the same thing.

GOPers only throw money upon themselves. No surprises here. Pffft GOPers.