War in Ukraine

#70,651
#70,651
hog88 said:
Russia's military was already degraded to the point of not being much of a threat to the US. After the collapse of the USSR they are and were not our biggest geopolitical foe and would have never been again.
Click to expand...

With hindsight we can acknowledge that now, but hindsight isn't usually around when you most need it - which is early on. China may be a paper tiger, but we won't know that unless push comes to shove.
 
#70,653
#70,653
hog88 said:
It was "security assurances" not guarantees but so did Russia. Those assurances were they were not going to be attacked by those giving the assurance, not promises of financial or military aid.
Click to expand...

That sounds a lot like a warranty that is backed by a plan not to do anything if the product is defective ... certainly lacking in good faith. An assurance is nothing without the intent to act.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#70,654
#70,654
AM64 said:
That sounds a lot like a warranty that is backed by a plan not to do anything if the product is defective ... certainly lacking in good faith. An assurance is nothing without the intent to act.
Click to expand...

The assurance was that we wouldn't attack them, the same as Russia's assurance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#70,656
#70,656
hog88 said:
Russia's military was already degraded to the point of not being much of a threat to the US. After the collapse of the USSR they are and were not our biggest geopolitical foe and would have never been again.
Click to expand...

However I want to remove them as a threat when a war between the PRC and the US erupts. I don't want to have to worry about two fronts. Hopefully our actions in Ukraine can provide deterrence that it never happens we shall see.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and AM64
#70,659
#70,659
hog88 said:
Your own link says that a security assurance is not the same as a security guarantee.
Click to expand...

Don't tell us you've gone over to the dark side and believe diplomats aren't weasels with every word they utter. Whether it's "assurance" or "guarantee" or some other word meaning to convey that we will stand behind the agreement, you either have to accept that we made a promise of support, or we sold someone a bill of goods. You either stand behind the words (as the other party understood them) or you are nothing ... dishonest, shirker, whatever. There is no way we can guarantee that Russia would abide by the agreement, but we certainly have an obligation (of assurance) to act if Russia does not abide by the agreement. Remember we traded ridding one nation of offensive nuclear weapons in exchange to protect them from the country gaining those weapons, we supposedly got something out of the deal.

Maybe considering that politicians are letting Iran join the club means taking nukes out of Ukraine was all an exercise in futility anyway, but Slick Willie signed.
 
#70,661
#70,661
hog88 said:
China has more men and material to throw at a war than Russia ever did.
Click to expand...

IF we are dumb enough to be maneuvered into a land war on Chinese turf. You know getting a critical mass of troops into battle across obstacles like oceans makes it a whole different story. That gets the talk into nuke territory or figuring out how to bring home the technology we've farmed out to Asia so that we put the ocean obstacle into play.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and norrislakevol
#70,663
#70,663
BeardedVol said:
JFC, this is what happens when you fail history multiple times as a kid, and then go on to willingly ingest Russian propaganda as an adult.

DISINFO: IN 1938, POLAND WAS A NAZI ALLY
Click to expand...

JFC dude, can you not read?

From your link:

This message is part of the Kremlin’s policy of historical revisionism and an attempt to erode the disastrous historical role of the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact by stating that Poland was a Nazi ally, so it should blame itself for the German-Soviet attack in September 1939. The claim that Poland was “an ally of Nazi Germany” goes against all available historical documents. Before WWII, Poland had tense political relations with Nazi Germany, which expressed open territorial claims on Poland (revision of the status of the Free City of Danzig and control over the “Polish Corridor”). Despite intense political pressure from Hitler, Poland consistently refused to become part of the Nazi block.

According to the pre-war plans of Hitler, Poland was supposed to be part of the “living space”/ Lebensraum for the Third Reich, a large part of its territory was planned to be incorporated into the German state and millions of Poles and Polish Jews were supposed to be exterminated.

Read similar examples of the Russian historical revisionism concerning Poland such as Poland posed a military threat to the USSR in 1938-1939, Nazi Germany considered Poland its best ally, If Poland realized a rational policy in 1939, Moscow would have had a different approach towards it and Poland re-writes the history of the Warsaw uprising accusing the USSR of its failure.
Click to expand...
 
#70,666
#70,666
AM64 said:
IF we are dumb enough to be maneuvered into a land war on Chinese turf. You know getting a critical mass of troops into battle across obstacles like oceans makes it a whole different story. That gets the talk into nuke territory or figuring out how to bring home the technology we've farmed out to Asia so that we put the ocean obstacle into play.
Click to expand...

You know damn well we are dumb enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#70,667
#70,667
AM64 said:
I never read it that way. Why would we plan to unilaterally attack Ukraine in the first place - especially if they had no offensive nuclear capability? That kind of assurance makes no sense.
Click to expand...

Read the memorandum.
 
#70,670
#70,670
AM64 said:
Don't tell us you've gone over to the dark side and believe diplomats aren't weasels with every word they utter. Whether it's "assurance" or "guarantee" or some other word meaning to convey that we will stand behind the agreement, you either have to accept that we made a promise of support, or we sold someone a bill of goods. You either stand behind the words (as the other party understood them) or you are nothing ... dishonest, shirker, whatever. There is no way we can guarantee that Russia would abide by the agreement, but we certainly have an obligation (of assurance) to act if Russia does not abide by the agreement. Remember we traded ridding one nation of offensive nuclear weapons in exchange to protect them from the country gaining those weapons, we supposedly got something out of the deal.

Maybe considering that politicians are letting Iran join the club means taking nukes out of Ukraine was all an exercise in futility anyway, but Slick Willie signed.
Click to expand...

When the hell are we going to expect our government to keep its word to us? You can’t expect me to GAF about our government breaking it’s word to a foreign country when they can’t keep their word to us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#70,675
#70,675
hog88 said:
Read the memorandum.
Click to expand...

I didn't get the same thing from it that you did. To me it wasn't about us attacking Ukraine, but defending Ukraine if someone else attacked because they agreed to disarm. Maybe that's because I just don't see any reason for us to attack Ukraine or for Ukraine to think we might.
 
  • Like
Reactions: USF grad in TN
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top