spenaroo Posted January 2 Posted January 2 you would think the Americans would be frothing over the possibility of returning to the golden era of war with Russia. even more direct then the Gulf war or Vietnam. And yet the two party system and the Trump factor has really limited any effectiveness. The republican's are doing everything they can to block aid 1 2
willedoo Posted January 3 Posted January 3 Things have changed with Trump wanting to turn the clock back to American isolationism. In the days of Bush, the Republicans loved a good old war, but not now. I don't think the current crop of western politicians realise the trap they are sleepwalking into. It seems like their only long term plan is to hope that putin dies and his successor will lose the appetite for Russian expansion. putin is testing the water for future adventures. His gamble is that the west will tire of war, while he won't. On the logistical side, he's also testing Russia's ability to out-manufacture the west and maintain the funding to do it. So far he's doing fairly good in that department. The west has ramped up very little production to supply Ukraine and are mainly getting rid of old stocks that are near their use by date. A lot of these things are no longer in production and when surplus stocks run out, the west will be caught out with their pants down and nothing left to give. The current state of affairs is due to weak western governments who by default are appeasing putin, and all the while trying to fool us into believing they're not. 1
willedoo Posted January 3 Posted January 3 The problem started when the U.S. and the U.K. sucked Ukraine into giving up their nukes in return for a security guarantee from them and the Russian Federation. They found out in 2014 that it wasn't worth the paper it was written on. That Ukrainian experience has become the textbook for aspiring nuclear powers like North Korea and Iran. Lesson #1 - this is what happens if you give up your nukes. I very much doubt putin would have risked a full on nuclear war with Ukraine if they were still the world's third largest nuclear power. 1 2
willedoo Posted January 3 Posted January 3 Giving up the nukes was the start of it. The main enabler of putin's current aggression was Obama's total failure in foreign policy. Obama was weaker even than Biden on foreign policy. putin and his mate Assad had a big laugh when Obama talked of crossing red lines. When the lines were crossed, Obama did nothing. When Russia took Crimea and half the Donbass from Ukraine, Obama barely slapped him on the wrist with a wet lettuce leaf. That and high oil prices gave putin those critical years of breathing space to arm up and finish the job on Ukraine. Enter Trump, another foreign policy failure who, rather than contain putin, became his new best friend. Biden is a slight improvement on his two predecessors, but still falls a long way short. This is Ukraine's problem - the Europeans are weak, Biden is weak, and any alternative Republican administration is totally missing in action when it comes to strong foreign policy. They are all doing their best to give this thing to putin. To save face, they drip feed supply to Ukraine and try to kick the can further down the road. I can see it backfiring on them. 1
facthunter Posted January 3 Posted January 3 You don't deal with LIARS. There's no point. Just WHO could actually trust Putin OR Trump for that matter? Nev 1
pmccarthy Posted January 3 Posted January 3 Governments today focus on the important things like transgender athletes, whingeing first nations people and LGBalphabet people. 1 1
octave Posted January 4 Posted January 4 On 03/01/2024 at 2:24 PM, pmccarthy said: Governments today focus on the important things like transgender athletes, whingeing first nations people and LGBalphabet people. I do listen to parliament often including Senate committee hearings and I don't believe that significant time is devoted to the things you suggest. Governments deal with a huge range of issues but I can't see any evidence that governments spend much time on the issues you suggest at the expense of other issues. I am happy to consider the evidence. 1 2
willedoo Posted January 14 Posted January 14 There's been no major developments on the battlefield for a while now. The winter weather has been bringing snow and lots of sticky black mud, making movement difficult. Ukraine doesn't have the resources left for any major advances so are concentrating on holding what they have. It's a worrying time for Ukraine; the U.S. government has announced that U.S. military aid to Ukraine has now ceased. Approved aid packages have now run out and aid will not continue unless Congress passes the bills. The Republicans won't vote for the current legislation unless it's tied to tougher border protection on the U.S. southern border. Meanwhile, the British PM just got a standing ovation after speaking in the Ukrainian parliament. A new U.K. aid package will cover training, intelligence sharing and drone manufacturing among other things. It's hard to figure out the logic of the White House. They obviously didn't want a short victorious war which they could have had, and now they are trying to find ways to support a long war. It's looking increasingly like Biden has fallen right into putin's trap. A long war will advantage putin and is the option he has the best chance of winning. 1
facthunter Posted January 14 Posted January 14 All Putin has done so far is to demonstrate what a LIAR he is and HOW an inept corrupt and frightened leader can behave, if allowed to. Nev 1
willedoo Posted January 14 Posted January 14 36 minutes ago, facthunter said: All Putin has done so far is to demonstrate what a LIAR he is and HOW an inept corrupt and frightened leader can behave, if allowed to. Nev And there's the problem Nev. The western backers are allowing him to do it. If they wanted to get serious, they could have kicked putin out of Ukraine in the last quarter of 2022 before they allowed him to build all those fortified, entrenched positions. 1
facthunter Posted January 14 Posted January 14 He spooks them with the constant threat of hypersonic A Bombs. Medvedev is even nuttier, He won't keep any deals. He never has. Putler is MAD like ALL despots become. Nev 1
nomadpete Posted January 15 Posted January 15 A report in Guardian.... "Ukraine’s commander in chief, said his air force had destroyed an A-50 long-range radar detection aircraft and an Il-22 control centre plane. Both were flying above the Sea of Azov on Sunday" Sounds like quite an achievement - it's a fair way from the front line. Any further gossip on this? 1 1
Jerry_Atrick Posted January 15 Posted January 15 I would say it is yet to be verified, but I don't know why Ukraine would bluff.. if it were a lie and the truth got out, it would be demoralising for the troops https://www.cnbc.com/2024/01/15/ukraine-war-live-updates-latest-news-on-russia-and-the-war-in-ukraine.html 1
willedoo Posted January 16 Posted January 16 It must be true as there's no mention of it yet in the Russian press despite being reported by the western media almost 24 hours ago. That would mean the Kremlin spin doctors are still figuring out how to spin it. Putting lipstick on a pig is their job. 1
nomadpete Posted January 16 Posted January 16 There was a mention that Russian soshul meeja has seen allegations that it wmust have been 'friendly fire'. Perhaps they believe the Ukrainians are incapabel of pulling this off? 1
facthunter Posted January 16 Posted January 16 They are supposed to be "Inferior" aren't they? What has Putin proven himself to be? Nev
spenaroo Posted January 16 Posted January 16 whats worse, the enemy shooting down your assets. or your own military shooting down key assets.... surely it being incompetence is worse 3
facthunter Posted January 16 Posted January 16 "Friendly fire" means you can't organise a coin slot dunny. Nev 1
Litespeed Posted January 16 Posted January 16 4 hours ago, facthunter said: "Friendly fire" means you can't organise a coin slot dunny. Nev Wow, Long time since a penny was spent for the look. 1
facthunter Posted January 16 Posted January 16 Extra for "LOOKING". Any coin will do. Use dollars or Australs if you like. The bank doesn't have to know where you spend your loose change.. Nev 1
onetrack Posted January 16 Posted January 16 Friendly fire is simply sheer unadulterated and undisciplined panic on the part of troops, unable to recognise friend from foe, and shooting at anything that moves. The Yanks did a lot of it in Vietnam.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now