Is arming Ukraine akin to waging war with Russia?

[theeedude]

The more important question is what happens if we give arms to Ukraine, and it doesn't work, Russia counter-escalates and the conflict spreads into other areas of Ukraine. Then what? We should be upfront and explicit with the Ukrainians about how far we will go to support them, and where we won't go, and let them decide if they want to escalate using US weapons. Otherwise, they could be left hung out to dry again, where we lead them on into a confrontation with Russia, and then leave them on their own.

 

[norseamd]

The more important question is what happens if we give arms to Ukraine, and it doesn't work, Russia counter-escalates and the conflict spreads into other areas of Ukraine. Then what? We should be upfront and explicit with the Ukrainians about how far we will go to support them, and where we won't go, and let them decide if they want to escalate using US weapons. Otherwise, they could be left hung out to dry again, where we lead them on into a confrontation with Russia, and then leave them on their own.

Yep. That is why I think we need to focus on solidifying the defenses of the Ukrainian homeland and not winning the fight against the Russians in the Donetsk and Luhansk provinces which are not crucial to the survival of Ukraine. Central and Western Ukraine and also Odessa are what we want to fortify and make it impossible for the Muscovites to conquer without years of grinding urban siege warfare with millions of casualties.

 

[bshole]

Not surprising that out of the rest of AT to agree with Jhhnn you are the one. Let me give you a hint if no one was to respond to Muscovite use of nuclear weapons what would prevent them from seizing on the political weakness and seize more and more land and use more and more nuclear weapons since no country would doing shit to stop them.

Unlike the rest of AT, I actually assign a rather significant value to the lives of American soldiers. It sickens me to see them killed and maimed in meaningless conflicts that do nothing to further the interests of America. Put plainly, whether Ukraine is controlled by Russia or not, it does not affect the interests of America. Russia is a country that can wipe America off the map and end civilization. It is ridiculous and counter-productive to consider engaging them in any way militarily over the Ukraine.

You guys are over-inflated on America's power as demonstrated by it beating up on 3rd world nations with laughable weaponry.

 

[blastingcap]

Unlike the rest of AT, I actually assign a rather significant value to the lives of American soldiers. It sickens me to see them killed and maimed in meaningless conflicts that do nothing to further the interests of America. Put plainly, whether Ukraine is controlled by Russia or not, it does not affect the interests of America. Russia is a country that can wipe America off the map and end civilization. It is ridiculous and counter-productive to consider engaging them in any way militarily over the Ukraine.

You guys are over-inflated on America's power as demonstrated by it beating up on 3rd world nations with laughable weaponry.

I mostly agree Ukraine is not worth the blood of American soldiers. Let Russia have it if they feel better about themselves and deal with the insurgency if they try to take all of it.

However, you overestimate Russia's conventional armed forces. They aren't THAT good. They got kicked out of Chechnya with huge losses in the first Chechen war, despite brutal tactics. They can beat up on an even worse army like Ukraine's, but if it ever came down to a conventional shootout between the US and Russia, Russia is toast. And that's not even counting the rest of NATO. And Russia doesn't want to nuke us any more than we want to nuke them so that's off the table.

 

[piasabird]

I think if Ukraine asks for help, we should help them with food, medicine and arms. The reason is North Korea just developed a new anti ship cruise missile and it looks just what the Russians use. Russia is arming North Korea so to hell with them.

Give them sniper rifles, crews missiles, stinger missiles, EID supplies and training, land mines, claymores, LAW (LIGHT ANTITANK WEAPON), small arms, armored cars, rocket launchers, etc. We should advise them to shoot down all civilian aircraft bound for Russia in their air space.

Russia sold Syria a thousands of military weapons. It is not illegal to provide weapons to other countries. We should give weapons to every country that borders Russia.

Tell Russia they have 5 days to vacate the country or we start providing them nuclear weapons.

 

[theeedude]

We should advise them to shoot down all civilian aircraft bound for Russia in their air space.

WTF?

 

[norseamd]

We should advise them to shoot down all civilian aircraft bound for Russia in their air space.

Tell Russia they have 5 days to vacate the country or we start providing them nuclear weapons.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lPJ9J-6vDw

 

[piasabird]

I a country is at war with you, under wartime rules all their shipping and airplanes can be seized or destroyed anywhere in the world. This is an old practice of war.

 

[norseamd]

WTF?

Dude I read that after I had already started the quick reply for his nuke quote and found the video so I had to go back and add it as a quick quote in my response.

Literally WTF? Great way to get China to start supporting the Russians.

 

[piasabird]

Russians use terrorists just like Iran.

Russia is a supporter of terrorism.

 

[brandonb]

Russians use terrorists just like Iran.

Russia is a supporter of terrorism.

According to the news, everybody who doesn't share our interests are terrorists and/or supporters of terrorism.

I'm sorry to say but they need a new buzzword. That one has become stale.

 

[sm625]

They want war with Russia, but they know the sheeple are not yet dumbed down quite to the point of tolerating such a move, yet. Their hope is that they are able to foment some sort of neo Nazi movement and that movement will take off organically. But of course it wont, because the region is so much more supportive of Russia than western interests. You can tell how bad they are doing just by the number of "vehicle breakdowns" the Ukrainian forces have suffered. (Vehicle breakdowns are synonymous with defections.) Any arms they send over there will only end up in either the rebels hands, or in the hands of extremist splinter groups who will use them for thuggish acts of no geopolitical importance.

 

[fskimospy]

They want war with Russia, but they know the sheeple are not yet dumbed down quite to the point of tolerating such a move, yet. Their hope is that they are able to foment some sort of neo Nazi movement and that movement will take off organically. But of course it wont, because the region is so much more supportive of Russia than western interests. You can tell how bad they are doing just by the number of "vehicle breakdowns" the Ukrainian forces have suffered. (Vehicle breakdowns are synonymous with defections.)

Someone better tell the Ukrainians that because they seem to be under the impression that they like the west much better.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/180182/ukrainians-prefer-european-union-russia.aspx

That's probably because the west isn't invading them and killing them like Russia is though. People get sort of pissy about that sort of thing.

 

[bshole]

Someone better tell the Ukrainians that because they seem to be under the impression that they like the west much better.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/180182/ukrainians-prefer-european-union-russia.aspx

That's probably because the west isn't invading them and killing them like Russia is though. People get sort of pissy about that sort of thing.

LMAO, the "West" has slaughtered more people around the globe in the last decade than the rest of the world combined. More than million dead in the Middle East alone. Where the fuck have you been?

 

[fskimospy]

LMAO, the "West" has slaughtered more people around the globe in the last decade than the rest of the world combined. More than million dead in the Middle East alone. Where the fuck have you been?

Huh? Unless Ukraine has been relocated to the Middle East your post is a non-sequitur.

Even if it wasn't, we're back to 'two wrongs make a right' territory again.

 

[blastingcap]

LMAO, the "West" has slaughtered more people around the globe in the last decade than the rest of the world combined. More than million dead in the Middle East alone. Where the fuck have you been?

The West wasn't entirely at fault for that. Give credit where credit is due. Many of those dead people were killed by non-Westerners, some of it in particularly grisly sectarian conflict and Assad's indiscriminate attacks on his own people.

 

[Atreus21]

Unlike the rest of AT, I actually assign a rather significant value to the lives of American soldiers.

Yes, so much value that you never use them even with good cause.

 

[Fern]

I find Merkel's position somewhat odd.

As I understand it she claims that the Ukraine can't win so no need to arm them. Sounds like she suggests appeasing Putin and is telling the Ukraine to capitulate (give up the East portion of the Ukraine).

It seems to me that as a practical matter only 3 things can happen:

1. We supply no arms and the Ukraine slogs on in a war no one thinks they can win.

2. They capitulate.

3. We provide defensive arms such as anti-tank and anti-artillery weapons and whatever small arms assistance they need (ammo etc).

I prefer number 3. I wasn't in the military and military is not a 'hobby' of mine. However, it seems to me that providing what I believe to be rather low level weapons such as anti-tank weapons would allow the Ukrainians to better defend themselves and drive the cost up for Putin.

Appeasing Putin strikes me as the immediately easy stance but I suspect will come with even greater costs later on.

Merkel and Europe in general have the same problem here they had with the Crimea: They need Russia's gas. How far will they let Putin push this leverage?

I also suspect the German people would prefer to stay out of it. I'm guessing they don't want to spend the money.

I don't think Merkel is stupid. I wouldn't be surprised if she's taking the public position of no arms to the Ukraine but behind the scenes encouraging Obama to do it.

Might be a quid pro quo. Merkel is arming the Kurds, we're not. So, we'll arm the Ukraine and not Germany. If so, I think that would make good sense on several levels.

Fern

 

[Darwin333]

Possibly. Would require the Turks to play nice with us and let us pipe the gas through them otherwise we would have to build a pipeline from Georgia to Bulgaria or Romania through the Black Sea which would not be cheap or quick which means we need something else to support us until such shit was made.

It would also require that the Turks had a shit ton of unused capacity in their pipelines (assuming such infrastructure actually does exist to get nat gas from the ME to Europe).

Anything that requires infrastructure build out would require Europe to endure a TON of pain until it was built.

 

[Jhhnn]

The more important question is what happens if we give arms to Ukraine, and it doesn't work, Russia counter-escalates and the conflict spreads into other areas of Ukraine. Then what? We should be upfront and explicit with the Ukrainians about how far we will go to support them, and where we won't go, and let them decide if they want to escalate using US weapons. Otherwise, they could be left hung out to dry again, where we lead them on into a confrontation with Russia, and then leave them on their own.

Hanging them out to dry seems to be the plan, with or without more guns. They've never been more than a pawn in a power gambit by the West.

It's inevitable, given that nobody other than our usual ravers are willing to make it into WW3.

We should encourage them to bleed as much as possible, obviously, to take the hit for the Team. Not that they'll become team members, anyway, but we can make 'em think that they might be.

Oh, and, uhh, where's our money, chumps?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markado...-collapsing-and-the-west-doesnt-seem-to-care/

Probably nothing that an outbreak of Peace wouldn't cure completely. There's a lot of money riding on their continued misery, derivatives & all, so I wouldn't count on that happening just yet.

 

[Darwin333]

Two wrongs make a right argument... again. My opinion is that this is naked aggression and that unlike previous Russian attacks on their neighbors they need to see that they will pay a price for it.

As for a tactical nuclear weapon being used, that seems extremely unlikely for a number of reasons. (neither Ukraine or the rebels have nuclear weapons, for one) If it is true though, that means Russia has engaged in a nuclear attack on a neighboring country. Whatever the response to that would be, it needs to be massive.

I can't think of a single reason that Russia would even entertain the idea of using tactical nukes on Ukraine. They could wipe Ukraine out with conventional forces a dozen times over.

 

[norseamd]

It would also require that the Turks had a shit ton of unused capacity in their pipelines (assuming such infrastructure actually does exist to get nat gas from the ME to Europe).

Anything that requires infrastructure build out would require Europe to endure a TON of pain until it was built.

 

[norseamd]

I can't think of a single reason that Russia would even entertain the idea of using tactical nukes on Ukraine. They could wipe Ukraine out with conventional forces a dozen times over.

But they can. Their psychology.

 

[bshole]

Huh? Unless Ukraine has been relocated to the Middle East your post is a non-sequitur.

Even if it wasn't, we're back to 'two wrongs make a right' territory again.

So..... how many Russian soldiers do you want murdered? How many American boys should be killed and maimed to accomplish the goal.... whatever the fuck it is.

I wish we could ship you and all the other warmongering chicken hawks straight to the front lines. When you all are wiped out in meaningless engagements overseas, at last we will have RATIONAL foreign policy in the United States. All the batshit crazy bloodlust filled murderering war dogs would no longer have a say in foreign policy.

We should reduce our military funding by about 95%. This would remove the possibility of these little murderous adventures America just loves to engage in. The military isn't used for national protection any more, it is used to bully other countries and fuck up shit.

 

[norseamd]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fO1Vhc88QkM