War in Ukraine

If those stats are close to accurate..that is like US forces in GW2 totally obliterated. Plus a couple of hundred thousand wounded.
Even the US would be set back decades with such losses. Reserves and obsolete equipment incoming.
Seems like the tank kills have dropped off.

Hey CCP,, now s a good time to go after Siberia..just saying.
 
War criminals



this is shocking.

uhmm-not-really-derrick-boner.gif
 
Why do we need to spend 5% of our annual defense budget to help fight an already incompetent military? Especially one that represents the "trailer park of the world" or the "gas station of the world".
We. Lol.

Russia is trailer trash culture. Getting rid of it helps everyone. I hope you adapt to change well..
 
It’s Been 10 Months Since Russia Invaded Ukraine. Where Do Things Go From Here?


Biden’s governance by autopilot and the foreign policy establishment’s unimaginative Eurocentric groupthink have combined for maximum danger.

It’s been 10 months since Russian President Vladimir Putin launched the second phase of his invasion of Ukraine, aiming to dismantle its government and replace it with one of his liking while annexing large portions of Ukrainian territory. Instructively, Putin launched the first phase of his operations against Ukraine in 2014 when Joe Biden was Barack Obama’s vice president.

With Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s recent address to a joint session of Congress and the Biden administration’s announcement of another $1.8 billion in military assistance, including the first-ever provision of a Patriot air defense battery, criticism of U.S. aid has been ramped up in some quarters, including among American conservatives.

To be clear, many of today’s critics were opposed to significant military assistance to Ukraine from the start. They warned that Russia might resort to nuclear weapons, that Russia would win anyway, that Russia’s core interests in Ukraine meant that they’d never give up the fight, that prior offers of potential Ukrainian accession to NATO meant that Russia had no choice but to preemptively invade, that Ukraine is corrupt with U.S. security aid somehow returning to America to line the pockets of corrupt politicians, that sending advanced weapons to Ukraine was escalatory and might widen the war, and that China is the main threat and any assistance to Ukraine is a zero-sum game that increases the risk in the Taiwan Strait.

Time has shown most of these concerns to be wrong or overblown, though the last matter, deterring China is far more complicated than one of simple weapons deliveries to Taiwan, given American deterrence is closely linked to credibility and a Russian victory in Ukraine would serve to encourage, not discourage, China.

Drawing on a career as an Army intelligence officer and service as young Reagan-appointed foreign affairs staffer in the Pentagon, I’ll first lay out some facts and then discuss current events and possible outcomes.

How Did We Get Here?

First, this war didn’t have to happen. It’s not a coincidence that both times Putin invaded Ukraine occurred when he perceived he was facing weak American administrations — Obama, and then Biden, fresh off the embarrassing debacle in Kabul. Were President Donald Trump reelected, Putin wouldn’t have rolled the iron dice.

Second, Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman had a hand in Trump’s narrow defeat. Imagine the counterfactual in a world in which that U.S. Army officer combat veteran decided that the elected president of the United States had more authority to conduct foreign policy than he did on behalf of the amorphous unelected “U.S. national security interagency.” It was Vindman’s belief that the president was acting against the consensus opinion of the Executive Branch Trump himself led that caused Vindman to breach the classified contents of a phone call between Trump and Zelensky. This triggered a partisan impeachment vote in December 2019.

It bears noting that during the Cold War era, a Ukrainian-born naturalized citizen national security staffer would find their actions and advice carefully vetted for conflicts of interest. It pains to state it, but for Vindman’s vain second-guessing of the president, Putin wouldn’t have risked an invasion of Ukraine with Trump in office, sparing the lives of some 20,000 Ukrainian soldiers and civilians. In Vindman’s case, be careful about what you wish for—Trump out of office—you might get it.

Lastly, we must deal with the world as it is and not as we wish it to be.

For whatever the rationale, Putin launched a massive offensive against Ukraine in February. Endlessly going over the why must not obstruct the present reality. Putin didn’t have to invade. He did. Deal with it and figure out how to best look after American interests.

The Ukrainian government, as is the case with most governments that arose from the rot of the Soviet Union, has struggled with corruption. Though an argument can be made that the searing experience of this war and the admirable response of Ukrainian civil society to it could give the Ukrainians a chance to enhance rule of law as they emerge from war. Even so, the vast majority of U.S. assistance to Ukraine has been in the form of weapons and ammunition, most of which is being backfilled right now — and most of which is made in America by American workers.

After 10 Months Of War In Ukraine, Where Do We Go From Here?
 
How Did We Get Here?
First... in 2013, an all-or-nothing EU deal that was intended on having the Ukrainians either sign an exclusive economic deal with them or have no deal at all. The Ukrainians were not given the option of being able to trade with both Russia and the EU in this arrangement.
Ukraine faces critical east-west tug of war over EU association agreement

Next, once Yanukovych signed the deal with it's historical regional partner, Russia, the Obama State Department orchestrated a color revolution in winter 2013/2014.



Afterwards, roughly 90 days of protests resulted in the overthrow of Yanukovych. The eastern and southern regions of the country were furious because the leader that they had helped to democratically elect was removed. At this point, protests in these regions begin. The Luhansk and Donetsk Republics hold referenda in the spring of 2014 to become independent of the Kyiv regime in hopes of being annexed by Russia. Putin/Russian Federation do not recognize these referenda in the hopes of finding a diplomatic solution that maintains the territorial integrity of Ukraine, yet offers the Donbas region autonomous status. Russia in the days after the coup did, however. recognize the independence of Crimea, home to their naval Black Sea fleet. and to their main warm water port.

After a year of fighting, the Ukrainian forces in Donbas were on the verge of a horrible encirclement and defeat at a place called
Debaltseve. Angela Merkel quickly moved in to throw in the towel and call for a ceasefire. The ceasefire agreements that resulted from this were the 2015 Minsk II ceasefire agreements. On the surface, this appeared to be a pathway to peace. But as we found out a few months ago from Petro Poroshenko and Angela Merkel about 2-3 weeks ago, the Minsk II agreements were only intended to be a stalling tactic in order to buy time for the Kyiv regime to build a NATO armed and trained army.

Minsk deal was used to buy time – Ukraine’s Poroshenko

Merkel’s confession could be a pretext for an International Tribunal

Meanwhile, for the following 7 years, as the Kyiv regime builds their army, they continue their attacks on the people of Donbas for the next 7 years. As Russia/Putin are pushing France and Germany to implement the Minsk agreements, the US/NATO are busy bees stirring up trouble.



After nearly 7 years of attacks and more escalation by NATO right on Russia's border, Putin makes one last effort to reach a diplomatic solution by offering a true European security deal. NATO/US rejected the proposal.

Russia Lays Out Demands for a Sweeping New Security Deal With NATO (Published 2021)

Lastly, in February 2022 during the Munich Security Conference, Zelensky threatened to abandon its committment of being a non-nuclear state, while simultaneously near the Donbas, the Kyiv forces were mobilizing for a late February/early March attack/assault on Donbas with roughly 60,000 troops.
 
First... in 2013, an all-or-nothing EU deal that was intended on having the Ukrainians either sign an exclusive economic deal with them or have no deal at all. The Ukrainians were not given the option of being able to trade with both Russia and the EU in this arrangement.
Ukraine faces critical east-west tug of war over EU association agreement

Next, once Yanukovych signed the deal with it's historical regional partner, Russia, the Obama State Department orchestrated a color revolution in winter 2013/2014.



Afterwards, roughly 90 days of protests resulted in the overthrow of Yanukovych. The eastern and southern regions of the country were furious because the leader that they had helped to democratically elect was removed. At this point, protests in these regions begin. The Luhansk and Donetsk Republics hold referenda in the spring of 2014 to become independent of the Kyiv regime in hopes of being annexed by Russia. Putin/Russian Federation do not recognize these referenda in the hopes of finding a diplomatic solution that maintains the territorial integrity of Ukraine, yet offers the Donbas region autonomous status. Russia in the days after the coup did, however. recognize the independence of Crimea, home to their naval Black Sea fleet. and to their main warm water port.

After a year of fighting, the Ukrainian forces in Donbas were on the verge of a horrible encirclement and defeat at a place called
Debaltseve. Angela Merkel quickly moved in to throw in the towel and call for a ceasefire. The ceasefire agreements that resulted from this were the 2015 Minsk II ceasefire agreements. On the surface, this appeared to be a pathway to peace. But as we found out a few months ago from Petro Poroshenko and Angela Merkel about 2-3 weeks ago, the Minsk II agreements were only intended to be a stalling tactic in order to buy time for the Kyiv regime to build a NATO armed and trained army.

Minsk deal was used to buy time – Ukraine’s Poroshenko

Merkel’s confession could be a pretext for an International Tribunal

Meanwhile, for the following 7 years, as the Kyiv regime builds their army, they continue their attacks on the people of Donbas for the next 7 years. As Russia/Putin are pushing France and Germany to implement the Minsk agreements, the US/NATO are busy bees stirring up trouble.



After nearly 7 years of attacks and more escalation by NATO right on Russia's border, Putin makes one last effort to reach a diplomatic solution by offering a true European security deal. NATO/US rejected the proposal.

Russia Lays Out Demands for a Sweeping New Security Deal With NATO (Published 2021)

Lastly, in February 2022 during the Munich Security Conference, Zelensky threatened to abandon its committment of being a non-nuclear state, while simultaneously near the Donbas, the Kyiv forces were mobilizing for a late February/early March attack/assault on Donbas with roughly 60,000 troops.


Nothing in your first link supports your assertion that the trade deal was “all or nothing”.
 

VN Store



Back
Top