RUSSIA-The Future 2015 & on

[fathertime]

And your Russian cheer leading is not strange?

[lordtiberius]

Miss Universe is prettier.

[JayH]

\LT-- we have been here before many months ago!!  US ground forces ( except specialised) would not be needed. That seems to be a consensus. Perhaps EU countries could assist in Ukraine itself -- some are busting to fight the Russians.
What the article said-- if US weaponry is made available-it will change the balance.
As it is now--the biggest personal loss of Ukraine is as a result of artillery fire-- something that the US has the technology to change.That is clearly a defensive weapon by definition.
If you look at the arsenal of weaponry technology the US has--relatively simple things that could be defined as "defensive:" would tip the scales in Ukraine's favour---- note-- that is as the war is now being fought-- any escalation would need more.

Approx  70% of Ukrainian losses have been as a result of artillery fire--  that indicates a disproportional result for the Russians.
The US  in particular has some technology that could go close to eliminating these losses--that is a defensive weapon by any definition.
At the very least--they should be given the weapons to defend themselves.
I see little point in drip feeding them over a period of time-get them what is needed urgently.Reading many (from both sides of politics) there is now a consensus this should be done-- except it seems from the leaders themselves of western nations.
The most sensitive issue for the US is to be sending ground troops abroad--but-- as I have said all along- they are not needed in Ukraine( only to train and offer specific expertise) as Ukrainian military are capable and willing.
Much progress has been made in less than a year by the Ukrainians -- and getting battle hardened and battle smarter all the time.They have taken a heavy toll on the Russian invaders(not that Putin cares)--they just need more help-- and urgently.

[lordtiberius]

Without military reforms inside the Kiev Military Council, all those US weapons will be in Russian hands.

[AkMike]

That's not true. 

[BillyB]

Don't forget that Turkey is not happy with the way that Russia has been treating the Tartars in Krym. They have the option of shutting off the access to the Black Sea from Russian shipping.

 That would make the Black Sea fleet a bunch of toys in a tub!

I doubt Turkey will do that since Russian made a deal to run gas and a pipeline through their country in exchange for a 6% discount. Greece will also get gas piped to them. Putin is making friends with NATO nations. It'll be hard for NATO to be unified on anything when sh!t hits the fan. As you mention elsewhere, Russia will also open a base in Cyprus in that part of the world. Putin is going to make sure that hole to the Black Sea stays open. Putin is going to make it easier to turn off gas to Europe. Europe freezes Russia out from SWIFT, Russia freezes Europe.


Gas as a weapon

[Изумруд]

I doubt Turkey will do that since Russian made a deal to run gas and a pipeline through their country in exchange for a 6% discount. Greece will also get gas piped to them. Putin is making friends with NATO nations. It'll be hard for NATO to be unified on anything when sh!t hits the fan. As you mention elsewhere, Russia will also open a base in Cyprus in that part of the world. Putin is going to make sure that hole to the Black Sea stays open. Putin is going to make it easier to turn off gas to Europe. Europe freezes Russia out from SWIFT, Russia freezes Europe.

The EU has proven itself to be completely spineless over Ukraine: disjointed, and with conflicting interests, the strains are beginning to show. Of course, Putin sees this as weakness, and any 'peace' deal that may be signed next week will be worthless, as he means to have his land-bridge to Crimea; possibly as far as Odessa or Moldova.  Meanwhile, it was a struggle for the EU to even agree to an extension of the present sanctions.  The EU nations don't have the stomach for confrontation it would seem, but it's coming to them whether want it or not.

[AC]

Ahem.  Yeah.  I am aware of US defensive technology.  And no where in that post did I say US boots on the ground.  Would not YOU agree some train up would be required?

The Kiev General Staff needs reform.  I am not the ONLY one saying this.  The US trains officers up the Battalion Command fairly well.  US Generals perform poorly.  Ask WSJ reporter and author Thomas J. Ricks:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_E._Ricks_%28journalist%29

I think you are confusing the issue of US politicians who interfered in the military's capability to get the job done with the issue of whether or not US Generals are up to the job.  They are, it's the politicians who need to be court martialed.  Starting with Rumsfeld, then Cheney and Wolfowitz. 

[AC]

The EU has proven itself to be completely spineless over Ukraine: disjointed, and with conflicting interests, the strains are beginning to show. Of course, Putin sees this as weakness, and any 'peace' deal that may be signed next week will be worthless, as he means to have his land-bridge to Crimea; possibly as far as Odessa or Moldova.  Meanwhile, it was a struggle for the EU to even agree to an extension of the present sanctions.  The EU nations don't have the stomach for confrontation it would seem, but it's coming to them whether want it or not.

Breaking up NATO and causing strife in the EU are all part of Putin's master plan.  It seems that he is having some success so far but the game is far from over.

[fathertime]

Without military reforms inside the Kiev Military Council, all those US weapons will be in Russian hands.

I agree that much of whatever we wind up giving will wind up in the wrong hands...and we probably won't even get paid for them!


Fathertime!   

[fathertime]

Approx  70% of Ukrainian losses have been as a result of artillery fire--  that indicates a disproportional result for the Russians.
The US  in particular has some technology that could go close to eliminating these losses--that is a defensive weapon by any definition.
At the very least--they should be given the weapons to defend themselves.
I see little point in drip feeding them over a period of time-get them what is needed urgently.Reading many (from both sides of politics) there is now a consensus this should be done-- except it seems from the leaders themselves of western nations.
 

No there is NOT a consensus...and for good reason...






Fathertime!

[AC]

No there is NOT a consensus...and for good reason...

You only say this because you're a Russian apologist who hopes to see Ukraine back under Russian domination. 

[fathertime]

You only say this because you're a Russian apologist who hopes to see Ukraine back under Russian domination.

I disagree...there is no consensus...that is wishful thinking...it appears that much of Europe would like for this to end, and if Russia continues to retain influence in Ukraine, then so be it.


Fathertime! 

[Boethius]

What about the millions in those regions who do not want to live under rebel rule?

[fathertime]

What about the millions in those regions who do not want to live under rebel rule?

what about them?   the world is full of imperfect situations and we don't risk massive war over it
.Fathertime!

[Boethius]

Your "solution" is no solution at all. 

[fathertime]

Your "solution" is no solution at all.

You are free to state your opinion and/or solution.  My take remains it is better to stay out, and not risk a wider war or worse.


Fathertime!   

[lordtiberius]

You are free to state your opinion and/or solution.  My take remains it is better to stay out, and not risk a wider war or worse.


Fathertime!

Is Ukraine a nation or not?

[JayH]

This is quite specific information of Russian Military units that have crossed into Ukraine.


Units of the Russian army fighting in the Donbass

Ukrainian crisis media center published infographic about the Russian troops invaded the Ukraine.

Infographics on the listed titles Armed Forces of Russia, the Russian General Staff and chevrons.

http://nv.ua/ukraine/kakie-podrazdeleniya-rossiyskoy-armii-voyuyut-v-donbasse-infografika-33527.html

[JayH]

Your "solution" is no solution at all. 

A  discussion on non-solutions is in link!
Link also concedes that a consensus now exists amongst many decision makers,those influential to decision makers and many observers-
I do not agree with the writer conclusions--but the observations in the process are of interest.He is now expressing a minority view!!
Why Arming Kiev Is a Really, Really Bad Idea
Washington pundits are jumping on a proposal to send weapons to Ukraine.

Should the United States start arming Ukraine, so it can better resist and maybe even defeat the Russian-backed rebels in its eastern provinces? A lot of seasoned American diplomats and foreign policy experts seem to think so; a task force assembled by the Brookings Institution, the Atlantic Council, and the Chicago Council on Global Affairs wants the United States to send Ukraine $1 billion in military assistance as soon as possible, with more to come. The Obama administration is rethinking its earlier reluctance, and secretary of defense nominee Ash Carter told a Senate hearing he was “very much inclined” to favor this course as well."
End Quote

A discussion of why the west and particularly the US  should help Ukraine now.As I wrote upthread--many are now getting the reasons to do something now-in the interests of trying to avoid a bigger problem later
Quote-
Those who now favor arming Ukraine clearly believe the “deterrence model” is the right way to think about this problem. In this view, Vladimir Putin is a relentless aggressor who is trying to recreate something akin to the old Soviet empire, and thus not confronting him over Ukraine will lead him to take aggressive actions elsewhere. The only thing to do, therefore, is increase the costs until Russia backs down and leaves Ukraine free to pursue its own foreign policy. This is precisely the course of action the report from the three think tanks recommends: in addition to “bolstering deterrence,” its authors believe arming Ukraine will help “produce conditions in which Moscow decides to negotiate a genuine settlement that allows Ukraine to reestablish full sovereignty.” In addition to bolstering deterrence, in short, giving arms to Kiev is intended to coerce Moscow into doing what we want.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/02/09/how-not-to-save-ukraine-arming-kiev-is-a-bad-idea/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_term=%2AEditors%20Picks&utm_campaign=2014_EditorsPicksRS2%2F9

[JayH]

At last-- some confirmation that this is being seriously discussed!


US 'may supply arms to Ukraine'


President Barack Obama says the US is studying the option of supplying lethal defensive arms to Ukraine if diplomacy fails to end the crisis in the east.

Russia had violated "every commitment" made in the failing Minsk agreement, he added, after talks with the German chancellor on a new peace deal.

Mr Obama has come under pressure from senior US officials to supply arms, despite objections from Angela Merkel.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31279621

[AC]

I disagree...there is no consensus...that is wishful thinking...it appears that much of Europe would like for this to end, and if Russia continues to retain influence in Ukraine, then so be it.

Uh huh.  Like I said you are a Russian apologist.  Furthermore and more importantly you drone on and on that the USA has no business helping Ukraine out.  That is completely false.  The USA is a signatory to the Budapest Memorandum.  Furthermore the USA is the one and only superpower, and the leader of the free World.  You may not believe in American exceptionalism (likely because you're not American but won't admit it) but many of us do.  We believe the USA and Great Britain have a legal and moral obligation to help Ukraine defend it's sovereign territory, because of our leadership role in the World and because we signed the Budapest memorandum.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism

[AC]

what about them?   the world is full of imperfect situations and we don't risk massive war over it

OMG!  The Russian apologist strikes again!  First of all those lives do matter and massive war would not be risked.  Putin is a small man with small hands, small feet and a small d*&^.  He would be crapping his pants if his underperforming military had to go head to head with the US military and NATO.

Equally important to the lives in the area is the concept that European borders are sacrosanct, at least they have been until now per International Law after WWII.  One reason WWII was fought was to put an end to bullies like Hitler redrawing the map.  It's really more than the lives initially lost, it's the sacredness of keeping borders as they are and therefore keeping peace throughout all of Europe. 

As a principal it is worth fighting for.  If not then when will it end?  It won't end there, because all the bad actors on the World stage are watching.  What the USA does or does not do has huge consequences not only for Ukraine, but for the whole world.  Maybe that's why Nuland said F*&^ the EU; because they don't have the balls to stand up for what is sacred.

[fathertime]

Uh huh.  Like I said you are a Russian apologist.  Furthermore and more importantly you drone on and on that the USA has no business helping Ukraine out.  That is completely false.  The USA is a signatory to the Budapest Memorandum.  Furthermore the USA is the one and only superpower, and the leader of the free World.  You may not believe in American exceptionalism (likely because you're not American but won't admit it) but many of us do.  We believe the USA and Great Britain have a legal and moral obligation to help Ukraine defend it's sovereign territory, because of our leadership role in the World and because we signed the Budapest memorandum.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism

Yes yes, the old I'm not an American thing once again.  I've got bad news for you I guess, I'm born and raised here in America.   No I don't subscribe much to the 'american exceptionalism'  model.   As far as the Budapest Memorandum, obviously nobody cares much for it, and Russia has claimed that the Western countries interfered in the political process by helping to  finance and support a Coup...


Fathertime!   

[fathertime]

OMG!  The Russian apologist strikes again!  First of all those lives do matter and massive war would not be risked.  Putin is a small man with small hands, small feet and a small d*&^.  He would be crapping his pants if his underperforming military had to go head to head with the US military and NATO.

 

Hmmm, don't agree with your assessment/reasoning here...I'm not at all convinced he is bluffing.


Fathertime!