Top U.S. general says it is time to consider arming Ukrainian forces

[AkMike]

Alaska wasn't that much cheaper per square mile that the Louisiana purchase. And it is much further away and at that time no infrastructure. Both were good deals for all involved.

[sleepycat]

Neville:
Please explain exactly how they are different.


I always rub someone the wrong way--truth does that. Unfortunately, at least on this issue, it is you who has an agenda. Sadly, it is developed out of real ignorance. Visit Russia and Ukraine sometime, not just a week vacation, but come live for a month or more in each country. I guarantee that you will see sides which today you find impossible to comprehend.

Until you do, your viewpoint is going to be limited to, "I was browsing and found an article..."

Ouch... That's gotta sting!
 

[mendeleyev]

Neville:

I noticed you did not respond to any of the individual arguments presented from the General or Lieutenant General

I have never done well trying to argue with the sound of wind between ears. When the good General has something unique to say, please wake me.

 

People don't have to live in Ukraine/Russia, or rub elbows with other journalists to form an educated opinion regarding US arms sales to Ukraine.

I did not mention rubbing shoulders with journalists. I did say that living in the region would give you an educated perspective. You have loads of opinions, but very limited knowledge. Your ideas would carry more credibility if you knew what you were talking about.

[calmissile]

Neville:
I have never done well trying to argue with the sound of wind between ears. When the good General has something unique to say, please wake me.

 
I did not mention rubbing shoulders with journalists. I did say that living in the region would give you an educated perspective. You have loads of opinions, but very limited knowledge. Your ideas would carry more credibility if you knew what you were talking about.

+100

[pokerintherear]

Several Russian media sources are now reporting that 170 humanitarian trucks have left Moscow with 1.9 tonns of aid headed towards Eastern Ukraine.

My friend Daniel at Moscow FM Radio poses this question: if an average over-the-road truck can haul an average of 22-25 tonns, then why so many trucks?

I understand what he is hinting at, but I am not a truck expert. Are those calculations reasonable?

In the US most 18 wheel type truck and trailers are limited to around 36 tons (depends on state) total for the truck and cargo. But they are capable of hauling much more if permitted.

[BillyB]

In the US most 18 wheel type truck and trailers are limited to around 36 tons (depends on state) total for the truck and cargo. But they are capable of hauling much more if permitted.

You live in Missouri that has 36 tons as a limit? Actually 40 tons for 5 axles is the legal limit for most States which translates 16 tons per axle. Axles are usually rated for 20 tons each but a truck would need an overweight permit which helps pay for the pounding the pavement takes from those trucks.

[fathertime]

Partisan Hack:

Neville:
I have never done well trying to argue with the sound of wind between ears. When the good General has something unique to say, please wake me.

The General and Lieutenant General have moved up the ranks a long way to have only 'wind between their ears'....It isn't a requirement to say anything 'unique'.  They have made good points to which you have arrogantly dismissed believing you are 'slightly more intelligent' than them, and everyone else that doesn't go along with your POV.  It also isn't a requirement to live in Ukraine to decide  that sending arms isn't the path to take.
[size=78%]  [/size]


Fathertime!   

[cc3]

The Ukrainians among whom I live in Ukraine definitely believe that receipt of Western defensive arms is essential for their survival against the muscovite and Caucasian hordes invading and terrorizing their nation.

[jone]

I have tried to stay out of the war arguments, simply pointing out when someone is telling a whopper.  But shortly before Minsk II, I advocated that the US now supply lethal weapons support to Ukraine.  But not for the reasons that many think:

I believe that before early summer, Russia will once again resume its incursion into Ukraine.  It is too expensive to build a bridge from Kerch to Krim and, quite honestly, that economy is bottoms-up there.  I also believe that Putin established his global directive to his armed forces back over a year ago.  It is what is keeping him in power.  No escalation of war, no support for Putin.

But Russia is needed on a grander playing field than Ukraine.  Issues surrounding the Middle East take precedence, in my mind, over events happening in Eastern Europe (as much as forum participants would like to think otherwise).  Western/Russian cooperation is important to stem the tide of fanaticism both in Iran and also in the various nations under siege currently.  So, why, then, if I advocate Russo/Western cooperation in other parts of the globe should I advocate supporting Ukraine through weapons supply?

I believe that Russia should be called to the carpet for supplying troops and weaponry that it claims is non-existent in Ukraine.  The only way that this can be done is to make the West an active participant in the conflict.  Simply this:  If you don't move your weapons and men out of Ukraine, then we will make sure that the Ukrainians can defend themselves from you.  And at a high cost to Russia. 

It sends even a greater message:  Ukraine may be your jumping off point (actually Georgia was) but we will show you that your increased military state must once again be thought to be too high a price for you to pay.  There will be no incursion into the Baltics.  There will be no belligerence in Poland. 

I believe that Ukraine can be sacrificed by the West.  But if it is, then what does that tell Russia about future incursions?  Into NATO countries?  Creating a weapons response in Ukraine allows the West to oppose Russian advances without the need to directly confront Russia as it will surely have to do in the future.  It allows there to be an ability to do business and get on with the idea that Russo/Western cooperation is necessary despite the advances made in Ukraine.

Russia has screwed the pooch, now, in terms of an image (Remember Russia at the time of Sochi?  That image is long gone!)  But across the divide of the Great Game, which is resumed after a quarter century hiatus, business can be done.

[lordtiberius]

Agree with Jone. 


When Romney called Russia our greatest geopolitical enemy, 2% of Americans agreed with him.  Now a plurality thinks Putin is enemy # 1 and if Obama's assessments about the Arab world and the Muslims were even close to being accurate, we would have an absolute majority.

Even with Nukes, enemies of this country don't fare well.

[fathertime]

I believe that Russia should be called to the carpet for supplying troops and weaponry that it claims is non-existent in Ukraine.  The only way that this can be done is to make the West an active participant in the conflict.  Simply this:  If you don't move your weapons and men out of Ukraine, then we will make sure that the Ukrainians can defend themselves from you.  And at a high cost to Russia. 

 

I think if weapons are supplied, Russia will then go in and massacre the Ukrainians with whatever reckless abandon is necessary...in part, to make a point to the west to stay the hell out of it.  Although things are going badly for Ukraine, they could be much much worse. 

But Russia is needed on a grander playing field than Ukraine. 

Yes they are...in addition if they decide to play on the opposite side of the ball, then all the nations they help/supply can become threats. 

. 

It sends even a greater message:  Ukraine may be your jumping off point (actually Georgia was) but we will show you that your increased military state must once again be thought to be too high a price for you to pay.  There will be no incursion into the Baltics.  There will be no belligerence in Poland. 

I believe that Ukraine can be sacrificed by the West.  But if it is, then what does that tell Russia about future incursions?  Into NATO countries?  Creating a weapons response in Ukraine allows the West to oppose Russian advances without the need to directly confront Russia as it will surely have to do in the future.  It allows there to be an ability to do business and get on with the idea that Russo/Western cooperation is necessary despite the advances made in Ukraine.
 

This type of hyperventilation(nothing personal)  reminds me of the build up to the invasion of Iraq.  I don't believe for a moment that Russia would make the bad decision of attacking a NATO country.  I don't believe they are going to inspire a revolution in the Baltics either.  We could say all sorts of things that Russia "Is going to do"...but that doesn't make it true.  If indeed Russia attacked Estonia or Poland, the war would then be on...I have no doubts the NATO countries would stick together, and they would have the support of most of the American public...but that is not the case in Ukraine...Ukraine is NOT a part of NATO, and NATO doesn't have an obligation to potentially commit us to WW3 over a non-aligned Country.   




Fathertime!   

[jone]

Fathertime said exactly the same thing prior to the Russian invasion to Ukraine.  He Was Wrong.

(Of course, he never admitted, like a man, that he was wrong.)

[fathertime]

Fathertime said exactly the same thing prior to the Russian invasion to Ukraine.  He Was Wrong.

(Of course, he never admitted, like a man, that he was wrong.)

Looks like I'm back off 'ignore'...but only when I post! Hahaha

I think you are outright lying now...but you can prove me to be mistaken by providing the quote and if it is in context I will admit I was mistaken.   I do recall you insisting Russia was launching a complete invasion very soon (around 1 year ago)...I recall thinking that was incorrect (which has been correct to this point).

Fathertime!

[Boethius]

I think if weapons are supplied, Russia will then go in and massacre the Ukrainians with whatever reckless abandon is necessary...in part, to make a point to the west to stay the hell out of it.  Although things are going badly for Ukraine, they could be much much worse. 

I disagree.  Russians will not tolerate lots of their soldiers going home in body bags.  Arming Ukrainians so that the weaponry is equalized will have that effect. 

[jone]

Fathertime,

You've been off ignore for months.  I just haven't read much of your stuff because, quite honestly, you call everyone but yourself liars.

Did you not write this?:

  "Most of the media outlets are calling what Russia is doing as 'fomenting'...that is different than invading, if we are talking about the East Ukraine areas.    Still,  if Russia wanted to invade they could do so, but they won't as that has not been their objective...unless of course the USA came in to interfere, which doesn't appear likely either...imo."

Along with a hundred other posts exactly the same? 

You have maintained all along that Russia hasn't invaded.  Whereas the rest of the world knows that they have.  It would be big of you to admit that you were wrong.  But in your pride, we know you never will.

As an aside, when it looked like Russia wasn't coming to the aid of the Separatists, I, at your insistence admitted I was wrong.  I spoke too soon.  But, for future reference, now you know why I refuse to engage you.  Because you can't admit when you were wrong.

The word 'lie' comes too quickly to your mouth.

[lordtiberius]

You are an idiot (nothing personal).

[fathertime]

Fathertime,

You've been off ignore for months.  I just haven't read much of your stuff because, quite honestly, you call everyone but yourself liars.

 

That is ANOTHER lie...I have stated that YOU have lied....most posters I don't believe are intentionally lying....Yeah I don't believe you weren't reading my posts, you had me on ignore (but found a way to read regardless).   

 



You have maintained all along that Russia hasn't invaded.   
 

This is a lie.  I have NOT maintained that Russia hasn't staged an invasion of sorts. 

 

Did you not write this?:

  "Most of the media outlets are calling what Russia is doing as 'fomenting'...that is different than invading, if we are talking about the East Ukraine areas.    Still,  if Russia wanted to invade they could do so, but they won't as that has not been their objective...unless of course the USA came in to interfere, which doesn't appear likely either...imo."

Along with a hundred other posts exactly the same? 

You have maintained all along that Russia hasn't invaded.  Whereas the rest of the world knows that they have.  It would be big of you to admit that you were wrong.  But in your pride, we know you never will.

 

You have not placed the quote in the context to what I was responding to at the time...which makes it difficult to say how reasonable/unreasonable the quote is. 


I have read that post and if you read it closely you will notice that I noted the media outlets were calling it fomenting (at the time).   At some point, and many times after I personally have reclassified it as an invasion of sorts...I have already done this.  Based on what I've seen/read I happen to believe that there is a lot of Pro Russian Eastern Ukrainians that are also involved.     


And your entire point is?   I've made some statements that are incorrect, and never claimed that I haven't....YOU have made major statements that turned out to be incorrect also.  So what? 


One difference is I didn't get all twisted up and storm off because of a difference of opinion, while you did.   


Fathertime!   

[fathertime]

I disagree.  Russians will not tolerate lots of their soldiers going home in body bags.  Arming Ukrainians so that the weaponry is equalized will have that effect.

If you know this to be true, then I'm sure Russia also knows this....so if that started to happen (which I have my doubts it would), what would stop them from employing long range bombers, and missiles, and annihilating large parts of Ukraine along with the  troops?  If Russia found that necessary to do to prevail, I think they would...and I think that would wind up making us (The US) get further involved....and I'm against that. 


Fathertime!

[fathertime]

You are an idiot (nothing personal).

What happened to all the jesus talk?...suddenly that takes a back seat when you get upset, and commence silly name-calling.    [size=78%] [/size]


Fathertime!   

[mendeleyev]

Bo:

Russians will not tolerate lots of their soldiers going home in body bags.  Arming Ukrainians so that the weaponry is equalized will have that effect. 

Exactly.

Neville does not understand the pressure that is felt already in the Kremlin by any hint of news regarding secret burials and dead sons.

Also there is the Russian - Ukrainian factor of history. When Putin stood on stage a few days ago and vowed that Russians and Ukrainians are one people, and will also be so, the crowd understood his words. I doubt that many outside of the region understand them fully. In so many ways, Kyiv is the birthplace of Russia, and Putin has said as much in his remarks regarding the baptism of Rus, and the sacred holy places of Ukraine as being a part of Russia's "birthright."

You'd have to search far and wide to find Russians who are not related to Ukrainians. That is why Russian media goes overboard in the idea that this is a "civil war" between Western influenced fascists and ordinary Ukrainians. When Russian boys are recruited to go fight to "protect the homeland" or to "save the Donbas children," they are not talking about another country, instead they are talking as if Ukraine is still a part of the "homeland" as in Soviet days.

Thus, when body bags roll home in numbers that cannot be ignored, Putin will have to answer not only for the deaths of Russian sons, but for the deaths of Ukrainian relatives, the Russian cousins, brothers, uncles, etc, of Russian families. The only way Putin succeeds at home is if the average Russian is allowed to think that Putin is defending their Ukrainian relations.

If a bigger conflict heats up, the approval polling numbers will plunge. When Grandmas and Aunts start to ask their Russian relatives, "why are you killing us?" it will be a brand new ball game.

[ML]

When Grandmas and Aunts start to ask their Russian relatives, "why are you killing us?" it will be a brand new ball game.

Perhaps not.

Ochka has distant relatives living in both Ukraine and Russia.  When the Ukrainian person tells the Russian what is happening regarding various events in Ukraine, the Russian responds by saying the Ukrainian does not know what is happening in Ukraine.  But the Russian knows because he/she sees it on Russian TV or reads in Russian newspaper.

I think Muzh reported also that an elderly relative was injured by Russian bullies in Kharkiv.  When telling this to her relative in Russia, the Russian replied that she must have just fallen and hurt herself.

[jone]

That is ANOTHER lie...I have stated that YOU have lied....most posters I don't believe are intentionally lying....Yeah I don't believe you weren't reading my posts, you had me on ignore (but found a way to read regardless).   



This is a lie.  I have NOT maintained that Russia hasn't staged an invasion of sorts. 



You have not placed the quote in the context to what I was responding to at the time...which makes it difficult to say how reasonable/unreasonable the quote is. 


I have read that post and if you read it closely you will notice that I noted the media outlets were calling it fomenting (at the time).   At some point, and many times after I personally have reclassified it as an invasion of sorts...I have already done this.  Based on what I've seen/read I happen to believe that there is a lot of Pro Russian Eastern Ukrainians that are also involved.     


And your entire point is?   I've made some statements that are incorrect, and never claimed that I haven't....YOU have made major statements that turned out to be incorrect also.  So what? 


One difference is I didn't get all twisted up and storm off because of a difference of opinion, while you did.   


Fathertime!

And you wonder why I ignore you?  Duh.

Word twisting.  Calling me a liar.  You can't open your mouth without posting words like that.

Sorry, but I refuse to engage you any more.  Post what you will.

[fathertime]

Partisan Hack:

Neville does not understand the pressure that is felt already in the Kremlin by any hint of news regarding secret burials and dead sons.

Also there is the Russian - Ukrainian factor of history. When Putin stood on stage a few days ago and vowed that Russians and Ukrainians are one people, and will also be so, the crowd understood his words. I doubt that many outside of the region understand them fully. In so many ways, Kyiv is the birthplace of Russia, and Putin has said as much in his remarks regarding the baptism of Rus, and the sacred holy places of Ukraine as being a part of Russia's "birthright."

You'd have to search far and wide to find Russians who are not related to Ukrainians. That is why Russian media goes overboard in the idea that this is a "civil war" between Western influenced fascists and ordinary Ukrainians. When Russian boys are recruited to go fight to "protect the homeland" or to "save the Donbas children," they are not talking about another country, instead they are talking as if Ukraine is still a part of the "homeland" as in Soviet days.

Thus, when body bags roll home in numbers that cannot be ignored, Putin will have to answer not only for the deaths of Russian sons, but for the deaths of Ukrainian relatives, the Russian cousins, brothers, uncles, etc, of Russian families. The only way Putin succeeds at home is if the average Russian is allowed to think that Putin is defending their Ukrainian relations.

If a bigger conflict heats up, the approval polling numbers will plunge. When Grandmas and Aunts start to ask their Russian relatives, "why are you killing us?" it will be a brand new ball game.

While that isn't a bad argument, you are making a lot of assumptions about how it will be perceived by Russians.    It rarely plays out the way people predict, and there are great risks.  The Russians may very well stand behind the Russian leader even if the going was to get much rougher.  And if it does play out the way you mentioned, that entails the deaths of A LOT of Ukrainians (and Russians).  Not to mention if we somehow did succeed in snubbing Russia (which is far from a lock), how would they retaliate in other regions?  Who would they help/support as a direct result of this?  Although unpopular here, I continue to hold that if parts of Ukraine remain heavily influenced by Russia, that is the lesser of two evils, so to speak.


Fathertime!   

[fathertime]

And you wonder why I ignore you?  Duh.

Word twisting.  Calling me a liar.  You can't open your mouth without posting words like that.

Sorry, but I refuse to engage you any more.  Post what you will.

Actually I don't care if you 'engage' or not.  You are such a crybaby though.  You think it is ok to question a poster's manhood, yet start whining when I say you are LYING, which I believe you are.  If you can't take a little chiding, then why try to dish it out?   I would have happily engaged you respectfully, but you were unable to do the same, so have a nice day! 
 


Fathertime! 

[lordtiberius]

What happened to all the jesus talk?...suddenly that takes a back seat when you get upset, and commence silly name-calling.    [size=78%] [/size]


Fathertime!

Huh?