Ukraine (9 Viewers)

[DaveXA]

I'm also not a fan of them talking down the US. If you don't like the aide you're getting you could always decline it and go it alone.

I wouldn't worry too much about it if it's not coming directly from Ukranian leaders. They're the ones making decisions. Anyone else is that armchair QB.

That said, ATACMS is next level and as much as I'd like to send them there personally, if it degrades our ability to defend ourselves, or is too much of an escalation in their theater of war, we should be very careful about sending them.

There aren't a whole lot of them to begin with. Europe has a number of them and they're in better position to deliver them. We could produce replacements to sent to Europe then rotate the older stock to Ukraine.

All that said, I still think we need to send more air assets that are capable of close air support. As long as Ukraine doesn't have that, a lot more soldiers will die on the ground trying to secure taken and re-taken territory. There will be losses of aircraft, but we have more than enough air power to donate a lot and not hurt our ability to defend not only ourselves, but our allies as well.

 

[boutte]

I'm also not a fan of them talking down the US. If you don't like the aide you're getting you could always decline it and go it alone.

Yeah because Russia controlling all of Ukraine's resources wouldn't be a big deal? Grain, rare Earth, oil and on and on.
If people think our country is defending Ukraine out sympathy for the people or some moral high ground you're mistaken. Ukraine being subjugated to Russia would be bad for business. Everything else is secondary.

The American people are a different story. But our Govt. doesn't really care about what we want. It's about money to the people at the top.

 

[DaveXA]

Yeah because Russia controlling all of Ukraine's resources wouldn't be a big deal? Grain, rare Earth, oil and on and on.
If people think our country is defending Ukraine out sympathy for the people or some moral high ground you're mistaken. Ukraine being subjugated to Russia would be bad for business. Everything else is secondary.

The American people are a different story. But our Govt. doesn't really care about what we want. It's about money to the people at the top.

Eh, I don't disagree a lot of it is strategic business decision making, but I do think there's definitely a humanitarian aspect of it, and that's why there's pretty broad support for Ukraine. Russia has done a lot to hurt themselves in the eyes of Americans. And clearly, Russia alone is responsible for invading Ukraine. The whole special military operation was just a cover for an unjustified invasion of a sovereign.

There are some in the government who view this as a humanitarian crisis as much as economic. To me, it's absolutely both. Nothing wrong with thinking that. I really can't think of a more justified partnership than with Ukraine at this point. There's a ton of goodwill built by Zelensky with his NATO allies and he deserves a lot of credit for building support for his country. It's characteristic of a strong leader during a struggle for their survival.

 

[Tapxe]

Yeah because Russia controlling all of Ukraine's resources wouldn't be a big deal? Grain, rare Earth, oil and on and on.
If people think our country is defending Ukraine out sympathy for the people or some moral high ground you're mistaken. Ukraine being subjugated to Russia would be bad for business. Everything else is secondary.

The American people are a different story. But our Govt. doesn't really care about what we want. It's about money to the people at the top.

Ukraine was expected to be lost within the first few days of the Rus attack. It was only after they managed to halt the advance that significant lethal aid was sent. This indicates we were prepared to accept the loss of Ukraine.

In fact, the prior administration attempted to withhold support making for a weaker Ukraine after initially providing lethal aid previous administrations were concerned would give Rus an excuse to escalate.

I won't say business isn't part of the equation, but I will say it's simplistic to think it the only consideration.

 

[SaintInBucLand]

With China's help it looks like Russia is getting bold. Why would Russia be sending any military recourses to do training exercises with China just to provoke a response from the U.S. military? Almost feels like they are trying to project strength when theirs is true weakness.

WSJ News Exclusive | Russia and China Sent Large Naval Patrol Near Alaska

Four U.S. destroyers were dispatched to monitor Russian and Chinese ships in the area.

www.wsj.com

A combined Russian and Chinese naval force patrolled near the coast of Alaska earlier this week in what U.S. experts said appeared to be the largest such flotilla to approach American shores.

Eleven Russian and Chinese ships steamed close to the Aleutian Islands, according to U.S. officials. The ships, which never entered U.S. territorial waters and have since left, were shadowed by four U.S. destroyers and P-8 Poseidon aircraft.

“It is a historical first,” said Brent Sadler, a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation and a retired Navy captain. “Given the context of the war in Ukraine and tensions around Taiwan, this move is highly provocative.”

 

[SamAndreas]

To answer that question, there are two reasons.

If the bomb explodes and punches through the deck the blast wave will hit the ground or water underneath and reflect back up. At the end the gap between the bridge and ground or water is closer and more of that reflected blast wave will do additional damage to the bridge. And if the bomb near misses the bridge off to one side, the blast wave lofting upward might still bring down the bridge.

The second reason is it is easier to make a repair to a bridge that is broken near the end. Just as soon as the enemy has been beaten in that area, your own side will likely need to fix that bridge to continue to pursue them.

Usually that is done by placing a short temporary bridge over the broken part.

 

[baarbogast]

 

[Sailorsaint]

Well, they were warned but chose to listen to the wrong people.

 

[efil4stnias]

War crime ends up karmas hands

 

[SamAndreas]

Operator Starsky here:

 

[SamAndreas]

 

[DCSaints_Fan]

Yeah because Russia controlling all of Ukraine's resources wouldn't be a big deal? Grain, rare Earth, oil and on and on.
If people think our country is defending Ukraine out sympathy for the people or some moral high ground you're mistaken. Ukraine being subjugated to Russia would be bad for business. Everything else is secondary.

The American people are a different story. But our Govt. doesn't really care about what we want. It's about money to the people at the top.

It was a strategic interest, not an economic one. Ukraine doesn’t have much in the way of natural resources, nor do they manufacture

It wasn’t like Iraq with oil. As the sub e, it was expected they would lose. As Tapxe said, the US didn’t start ramping up support until after about a week or so of fighting

 

[baarbogast]

 

[baarbogast]

 

[baarbogast]