If Ukraine has been shut off from receiving intel for their missile strikes, they could just start lobbing missiles into populated Russian cities.
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
Since the last thread was closed right after I posted this article I decided to transpose it over to this thread.................
Trump's decision to stop intelligence-sharing will cost lives, Ukrainians say
The White House is not only pausing shipments of military equipment to the war-torn country, but also intelligence Kyiv uses to stop strikes on civilians.
KYIV, Ukraine — Ukraine may have enough weapons to fight Russia unaffected for a few weeks at least, but President Donald Trump’s decision to stop sharing intelligence will cost civilian lives almost immediately, dismayed Ukrainians said Thursday.
Trump’s decision to halt intelligence came as European leaders, including Ukrainian President Volodymy Zelenskyy, convened a summit in Brussels as they attempt to cope with an upended landscape in which the Trump administration appears to be treating them with hostility while seemingly warming to the Kremlin.
Miles away from these high-powered meetings, ordinary Ukrainians may have to confront the real-world consequences of the White House’s U-turn.
As Washington turns off the tap on its $65 billion of military aid, Ukraine will also now have to do without American intelligence that has helped it to anticipate Russian attacks and troop movements, and avoid nightly barrages from Russian drones on its cities and infrastructure.
Viewed from the homes and apartments of Kyiv, it seems like “a very petty decision by our alleged ally,” said Myroslava Yeremkiv, 33, who manages donations at a nongovernmental organization in the capital. “The United States has the power at least to protect and save the lives of civilians from Russia’s brutal and terrorizing attacks … and you just choose not to.”
The White House cut off this intel feed following the disastrous Oval Office meeting last week between Trump, Vice President JD Vance and Zelenskyy. Though Trump’s team hinted that the pause is a negotiating tactic to ensure Zelenskyy is “ready for peace,” it has nonetheless shocked military and intelligence experts worldwide.
That feeling is no less deeply felt in Kyiv.
“This looks like a thug tactic — blackmailing and trying to break Ukrainian society into submission before negotiations,” Yeremkiv said, calling it a “very weak and pathetic decision.”
In some of the first practical consequences of that rupture, U.S. shipments of weapons and equipment already en-route to Ukraine were halted Monday night, a U.S. defense official told NBC News. So immediate was that order, that planes carrying vital aid for the Ukrainian war effort turned around in the sky, they added.
“I really, really hope that in the near future we can restore sharing of this information,” said Oleksandr Musiienko, head of the Kyiv-based Center for Military and Legal Studies. “We will lose some types of information about flying warplanes from Russian airfields, about launching their terrorist attacks,” added Musiienko, who also serves in the country’s Territorial Defense Forces. “This means that we do not have enough security and defense for our civilians.”
The U.S. is not the only country providing military aid and intelligence. But it is by far Ukraine’s largest single contributor of both. It will “be extremely difficult to fully compensate for this loss with our own capabilities or those of Europe,” according to Mykola Bielieskov, a research fellow at the National Institute for Strategic Studies, a Ukraine government-backed think tank.
Despite Moscow having the upper hand, Ukraine has slowed or even halted Russia’s grinding winter advances. Kyiv has managed to shoot down most of the hundreds of Russian drones fired almost nightly at civilian targets in cities. That’s partly down to $64 billion in American military assistance and $66 billion provided by all other countries combined, fueling Ukraine’s fighting spirit that confounded predictions of swift Russian victory.
At the European Union summit Thursday, Zelenskyy thanked the Europeans, who unlike Trump have committed to Kyiv’s unconditional defense, which they see as a bulwark against wider Russian aggression. “It’s great that we are not alone,” he told his fellow leaders.
Some of this money covers intelligence, with U.S. know-how helping the Ukrainians to wield American-supplied materiel such as the High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems, commonly known as HIMARS, and the Army Tactical Missile System, or ATACMS.
Away from the battlefield, the decision to pull the plug — and pull it so publicly — will send shock waves through America’s intelligence partners around the world, former officials said.
“The signal it sends is atrocious,” said Marc Polymeropoulos, a former senior CIA officer. “It’s a signal to the rest of the world that the U.S. is not a dependable ally.”
This message will also be heard loud and clear in Moscow.
“Every day that passes without a solution can be costly for Ukraine, particularly if Russia decides to exploit this weakness,” said Michael A. Horowitz, a geopolitical and security analyst who is the head of intelligence at the Le Beck consultancy.
“The spat is public. Russia knows about this, so they will try to take advantage.”
They proved themselves a paper tiger when their 3-day operation dragged on past a year. By all rights, they should have steamrolled Ukraine.
And then they proved they're still a threat by pouring all their resources (economic and manpower) into continuing the fight despite eye-watering losses. It can absolutely be both.
I do get what you are saying. Yes, they can be both. For me, it's somewhat a question of degree. There's your measured take vs some takes that are more histrionic on both ends.
I do somewhat question the they should have steamrolled assumption. I lean towards they were more paper than tiger before the invasion. Part of that is because they no longer had the materials from Ukraine that they controlled as the USSR. I think that's part of the reason for the war. They needed the materials to keep pace, perhaps even maintain their spot in the pecking order, as a "superpower." The old equipment breaks/had broken down. I think modernization requires materials that are in the Ukraine that they don't have their own stocks of, and so can only import limited supplies (what countries that don't want them strong will sell them), which hampers production.
Yes, they are pouring resources, but if NATO wanted to stop them/decimate them, it would be a one sided conventional war. How big really is the threat? Short of nukes, the military apparatus in Russia isn't really scaring the US war machine. I think this is somewhat why the approach to the war is what it is? We don't want Russia to be allowed to get the resources to compete, but we don't really worry about them as is. Really (?) we want the resources for "us." Making both weak can lead there.
Maybe I played too much Risk/Civilization/Crusader Kings in the day and wasn't around when Russia really was on the cutting edge and we were doing cold war drills, but the pieces just seem to fit better this way than "Oh no, save us from Russia!" and "Ukraine was kicking their butt!" which is what some people seem to vacillate between.
Edit: I do think Trump is handling it like a hamfisted crackpot regardless of the situation.
Last edited by Bull_Dawg; 03/06/2501:32 PM.
You mess with the "Bull," you get the horns. Fiercely Independent.
I think part of what makes them "scary" is their close ties with China. China is the real wildcard in terms of escalating with Russia.
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
I think part of what makes them "scary" is their close ties with China. China is the real wildcard in terms of escalating with Russia.
I don't know. I kind of feel like China-Russia ties are of the enemy of my enemy variety more than friends/allies. Maybe a bit of keep your enemies close "friends." China doesn't want their rival ("US"/"the West") getting stronger. They like the balance where it is.
.02
I'm not sure living in Japan and a few visits to Hong Kong make me an expert (I'm sure they don't), but I was an interested observer while doing WESTPACs.
I do agree there is uncertainty there with China. That's personally why I like the plausible deniability approach to ending the war.
You mess with the "Bull," you get the horns. Fiercely Independent.
And one of the main reasons we see China having control over so much rare earth minerals is in large part due to their investment in Africa. I posted about this quite some time ago. The Belt and Road Initiative has helped make that possible.
This is a very long article but goes a long way in explaining how the Belt and Road Initiative is benefiting China. As it seems we are becoming more isolationists they are expending their global ties and investments which as of now is giving them a huge advantage..................
China’s Energy Empire in Africa and Its Threats to U.S. National Security
Trump envoy says Ukrainians ‘brought it on themselves’ after US pauses aid and intelligence sharing
Ukraine was given “fair warning” by the White House before President Donald Trump this week ordered a pause on U.S. military assistance and intelligence sharing with Kyiv, a senior administration official said Thursday.
The Republican administration announced the pauses this week after Trump and President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’sOval Office meeting devolved into a shouting match, with the U.S. president and Vice President JD Vance excoriating the Ukrainian leader for being insufficiently grateful for the tens of billions of dollars in U.S. assistance sent to Ukraine since Russia invaded three years ago.
Retired Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg, Trump’s special envoy to Ukraine and Russia, said the pause is already having an impact on Kyiv, adding that the Ukrainians “brought it on themselves.”
“The best way I can describe it is sort of like hitting a mule with a two-by-four across the nose,” Kellogg said at an event Thursday at the Council on Foreign Relations. “You got their attention.”
That's diplomacy at its finest. No doubt someone will tell us how great it is and how effective.
Meanwhile Trump finally threatened Russia with massive sanctions and tariffs .... And yet somehow it feels like it's Only to cover the blowback about how he has cozied up to Russia and he wants to be able to pound his chest and claim. He's threaten them with something. What a croc!.
The more things change the more they stay the same.
There were several walk backs this week. Both on that front and also on the affirmation that the cabinet was in charge of the firings and not Elon. That was in response to the veterans being fired and the senators and cabinet members starting to raise hell, albeit behind closed doors.
There’s also the ever-swinging pendulum of tariffs.
The problem when you go on an aggressive offense without knowing what the hell you’re doing is that you eventually put yourself in an untenable position with fallout, not unlike his first administration. Now the fixers are coming in to try and pick up the pieces before he regroups and goes on the wild offensive again, I’m betting.
Chaos reigns.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
I often wonder if those who "stand with Ukraine" would go stand with Ukraine... in Ukraine.
Why? What's that got to do with anything? Just a meaningless point. Would you say that to every American citizen that supports the US army? No. But but suddenly you think you've got a gotcha moment .... which you haven't
The more things change the more they stay the same.
I often wonder if those who "stand with Ukraine" would go stand with Ukraine... in Ukraine.
I know myself... and I know that if America found itself in the same situation, my ancient old-ass ass would take up arms to defend my country. So no... at this time, I probably wouldn't cross the Atlantic to fight on foreign soil, but I will stand up in solidarity to help in any way I can, a sovereign nation who was invaded by a despotic nation right next door. I'll give my money. I'll give my online help. I'll give my total support to a democracy under siege on the front lines of an attack from an authoritative ruler whose only motivation is to re-create the Soviet Union... our historical enemy.
From your most recent posts, I gather that your mileage differs. So be it.
Tell us: When did you stop believing in Our Democracy... and describe for us the moment when you were dragged away from all that made US the bastion of what Made America Great Always on the world's stage?
I enthusiastically invite your response. Because I have an absolute pregnant payload of rebuttal just waiting for you to respond.
I often wonder if those who "stand with Ukraine" would go stand with Ukraine... in Ukraine.
That was a dumb thing to say.
It's what they do. You know, "America, love it or leave it."
While they whined, biotched and carried on the entire eight years Obama was president and even went so far as to try and overthrow the 2020 election when Biden was elected and claimed he stole that election four his entire term, they expect us to either shut up about trump or leave. What a bunch of hypocrites they are.
If that's actually a question they feel they should ask, I have no idea why they aren't saying they stand with Russia. The very man they support does and the sad thing is he is one of the biggest enemies our nation has while trump sucks his backside.
The people who stand with Ukraine aren't the problem here. The people who stand with Russia's puppet are.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
I often wonder if those who "stand with Ukraine" would go stand with Ukraine... in Ukraine.
So are you starting to get the idea behind only sending equipment to arm the Ukrainians so they can stay in the fight?
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
I often wonder if those who "stand with Ukraine" would go stand with Ukraine... in Ukraine.
Tell us: When did you stop believing in Our Democracy... and describe for us the moment when you were dragged away from all that made US the bastion of what Made America Great Always on the world's stage?
I enthusiastically invite your response. Because I have an absolute pregnant payload of rebuttal just waiting for you to respond.
Bring this to me. I dare you. I invite you.
In 3... 2... 1...
I never believed we were a democracy because.... we are not a democracy. We are a republic (constitutional federal republic) that elects representatives in a democratic way. The officials we elect, vote on many representatives and laws who we do not get to vote on. As an example: we don't vote for POTUS or their cabinet (senate votes on cabinet members). Our votes for potus are essentially a poll to tell the EC how to (some forced) to submit their vote. Also, citizens don't vote for federal laws. In the same manner, the representatives we voted for submit or vote on laws.
I feel like many Democrats struggle with this concept.
Further proof you want a president to be a dictator and fire the very people that make sure every president not abuse their power? So the same way it is in Russia? Well done Comrade.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
Further proof you want a president to be a dictator and fire the very people that make sure every president not abuse their power? So the same way it is in Russia? Well done Comrade.
0% true.
Watchdogs are hired and fired all of the time. They are not a part of the government. They are 3rd party companies like DOGE.
Clinton fired/demanded resignation of something like 93/94 US attorneys.
U.S. attorneys are not IG's. Their role isn't oversight of the exective branch or to defend the wrongful firing of government employees or whistle blowers who report corruption in government.............................
Hampton Dellinger, the fired head of the Office of Special Counsel, warns that President Trump's ouster of independent watchdog agencies and offices threatens government oversight.
Dellinger was head of the Office of Special Counsel, which handled federal employee complaints and government whistleblowers, until he was fired in February. In addition to Dellinger, Trump also removed the director of the Office of Government Ethics, the independent agency responsible for overseeing ethics rules and financial disclosures for the executive branch, and 17 inspectors general, auditors appointed to root out abuses of power, waste and mismanagement.
What the watchdogs do
After the Watergate scandal under President Nixon, Congress set up a system to audit the executive branch and ensure the rights of federal workers. Congress has guarded watchdog independence from politics so that no president can use these powerful auditors to punish enemies or hide their own fiascos.
President Trump told reporters on Air Force One in January that firing the watchdogs is "a very standard thing to do." But, no president has fired the heads of the watchdog offices, en masse, in 44 years. In 1981, when the offices were brand new, then President Ronald Reagan fired all 15 watchdogs then serving because he wanted the "fullest confidence" in each inspector general. After congressional pushback, he rehired a third of them.
U.S. attorneys are not IG's. Their role isn't oversight of the exective branch or to defend the wrongful firing of government employees or whistle blowers who report corruption in government.............................
Hampton Dellinger, the fired head of the Office of Special Counsel, warns that President Trump's ouster of independent watchdog agencies and offices threatens government oversight.
Dellinger was head of the Office of Special Counsel, which handled federal employee complaints and government whistleblowers, until he was fired in February. In addition to Dellinger, Trump also removed the director of the Office of Government Ethics, the independent agency responsible for overseeing ethics rules and financial disclosures for the executive branch, and 17 inspectors general, auditors appointed to root out abuses of power, waste and mismanagement.
What the watchdogs do
After the Watergate scandal under President Nixon, Congress set up a system to audit the executive branch and ensure the rights of federal workers. Congress has guarded watchdog independence from politics so that no president can use these powerful auditors to punish enemies or hide their own fiascos.
President Trump told reporters on Air Force One in January that firing the watchdogs is "a very standard thing to do." But, no president has fired the heads of the watchdog offices, en masse, in 44 years. In 1981, when the offices were brand new, then President Ronald Reagan fired all 15 watchdogs then serving because he wanted the "fullest confidence" in each inspector general. After congressional pushback, he rehired a third of them.
Presidents have fired plenty of watchdogs for one reason or another during their time in office. Presidents have also left watchdogs in place and basically removed their ability to watch. Watchdogs have also been found to be corrupt.
I have shown you clear cut evidence that nothing of this magnitude like has happened since Reagan. And that was shortly after these safeguards were put in place. And even then the push back from congress was so strong that he hired some of them back.
You just aren't interested in the facts.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
I have shown you clear cut evidence that nothing of this magnitude like has happened since Reagan. And that was shortly after these safeguards were put in place. And even then the push back from congress was so strong that he hired some of them back.
You just aren't interested in the facts.
so... it's happened. Got it.
Obama fired something like 200 military leaders. That was a first of it's kind.
The point I was trying to make is that all presidents seem to do something that is shell shocking to the opposite party. They find ways to get watchdogs/leaders/cabinet members etc aligned with their political goals.
That isn't anything close to what this is. This was strictly done to abolish any oversight of the executive branch. To abolish any way for whistle blowers to report corruption in government. To abolish any protection for government workers they are guaranteed.
And no, it was attempted by Reagan. He was actually called out for it and had to hire people back. This is what's wrong today. People such as yourself normalizing things that are in no way normal.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
I often wonder if those who "stand with Ukraine" would go stand with Ukraine... in Ukraine.
maaaan i rather deploy to Ukraine and actually defend people's freedom than the illegal war i deployed in.
Hell, the movies and TV shows Americans get 20 years after the conflict would be worth the deployment. Finally defeating the commies once and for all? I'm bout to steal an eagle.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
Putin aide casts doubt on US ceasefire plan as American envoy arrives in Moscow
A Russian presidential aide has cast doubt on a US ceasefire proposal for Ukraine, as American special envoy Steve Witkoff arrived in Moscow to brief Kremlin officials on the peace plan.
As the Trump administration emphasizes that the ball is now in Russia’s court, Kremlin aide Yuriy Ushakov said Thursday that Moscow doesn’t want a temporary ceasefire, claiming it would give a break to the Ukrainian army. Ushakov said he explained Russia’s stance to US National Security Adviser Michael Waltz in a Wednesday phone call.
“(I) outlined our position that this is nothing more than a temporary respite for the Ukrainian military and nothing more,” Ushakov said in an interview with Russian state media, pouring cold water on the proposal before Thursday’s talks began. “We believe that our goal is a long-term peaceful settlement. That is what we are striving for.”
The Kremlin has previously ruled out a temporary ceasefire, but this is the first time a senior Russian official has outlined that position since the United States and Ukraine held talks in Saudi Arabia earlier this week, in which Kyiv accepted proposals for a 30-day US-backed ceasefire covering the entire frontline.
Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov was quick to add that Ushakov’s remarks on a temporary truce should not be seen as a Russian rejection of the US proposal.
Peskov told CNN that Moscow was awaiting further, direct information on the proposal before making a decision.
Witkoff arrived in Moscow Thursday, a source familiar with the situation told CNN.
CNN has asked the White House and US State Department for comment.
Ushakov also claimed ahead of Thursday’s talks in Moscow that “the Americans and we think that there can be no talk about NATO in the context of the Ukrainian settlement and in the context of Ukraine’s future.”
Previously, Moscow said it would be unacceptable for troops from NATO countries to be present in Ukraine, even under national flags. On Thursday, Russian foreign ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova went further, rejecting “any” foreign military presence.
“For us, it is absolutely unacceptable to deploy units of the armed forces of other states in Ukraine under any flag, whether it be a foreign contingent, military bases, or some peacekeeping operations,” Zakharova said, adding that Russia would respond with “with all available means.”
When US Secretary of State Marco Rubio was asked Wednesday about the possibility of European troops acting as peacekeepers, the top US diplomat responded: “There’s different ways to construct a deterrent on the ground.”
US President Donald Trump said on Wednesday that the ball is now in Russian President Vladimir Putin’s court in terms of bringing the war in Ukraine to a halt.
“We’re going to have to see. It’s up to Russia now,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office, as he declined to comment on whether he has a meeting scheduled with the Russian leader.
Meanwhile, the Russian military said Thursday it had recaptured Sudzha, the largest town that Ukraine has once occupied in the Kursk region, threatening Kyiv’s sole territorial bargaining chip amid pressure to negotiate an end to the war.
Its recapture would represent a major symbolic victory for Russia. Although Sudzha is a small place, with a population of about 5,000 people before Ukraine’s incursion, it was one of the only key towns still held by Ukraine.
I find it hilarious that Z worked with Europe to get to a place worth negotiating from, before baiting Trump into calling Putin to the table. You guys see the French planes they are flying now? Macron stepped up.
![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/fkjZc8B/Bull-Dawg-Sig-smaller.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/e6TL6PJ.jpg)
![[Linked Image from aljazeera.com]](https://www.aljazeera.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/INTERACTIVE-UKRAINE-RARE-MINERALS-GLOBAL-DISTRIBUTION-FEB27-2025-1740694424.png)
