Russia Invades Ukraine XVII

[Huckleberry]

I think anyone supporting the Russians is a fool and my grandfather is rolling over in his grave at the countless aunts and uncles I have who are passively and actively doing so because Trump’s stance on it.
But with that said, there are many on the left and never Trump faction who are only outraged by the stoppage of US aid and support to Ukraine because of the potential spin Trump and Vance are going to put on it.

I share your disdain for both of these factions.

I think the miscalculation by the left at basing our policy against Russian aggression off of how we handled it with their invasion of Afghanistan is a sign that they don’t see the difference between a Russian leader like Gorbachev and one like Stalin. One is capable of looking at things from a bigger perspective and one likes to incinerates ants from a magnifying glass all day because it’s fun. Putin is the latter so economic sanctions and large casualties aren’t really a big deal in his view. I mean the guy literally used sarin gas on a movie theater just to show the Chechens that he doesn’t negotiate with them.

This perspective seems valid, especially in hindsight. The war has certainly not gone well for anyone. And Putin is undeniably a monster, regardless of the admiration certain American politicians have for him.

 

[Bamaro]

Speaking as someone who has a mostly negative view of Trump, the prospect of his ego boost has absolutely nothing to do with my stance on any issue. From my perspective, I think most Trump policy supporters would follow the guy off a cliff, regardless of the circumstances. They're ok if Ukraine is screwed since it appears to them that Trump is the person calling the shots.

For the record, I recognize that the war needs to end and that Ukraine will likely be seen as the loser, but how the eventual agreement affects the future of Ukraine, Europe as a whole, and NATO is what really matters.

And Taiwan

 

[Tidewater]

Speaking as someone who has a mostly negative view of Trump, the prospect of his ego boost has absolutely nothing to do with my stance on any issue. From my perspective, I think most Trump policy supporters would follow the guy off a cliff, regardless of the circumstances. They're ok if Ukraine is screwed since it appears to them that Trump is the person calling the shots.

For the record, I recognize that the war needs to end and that Ukraine will likely be seen as the loser, but how the eventual agreement affects the future of Ukraine, Europe as a whole, and NATO is what really matters.

This is a case in which the sports analogy fails us.
In a college football game, the play continues until one said has won and the other has lost.
In war, sometimes the war continues until one said has been utterly defeated, but that is actually a rarity. Even in the Second World War, the Japanese had one condition (keep the emperor), and they made that stick.
In the Russo-Ukrainian War, Ukraine's going in position was to retain its sovereignty and independence and recover the territories lost in Crimea and the Donbas. Russia's political objective was to wipe Ukraine out as an independent political entity. (Putin would have been happy to either annex Ukraine outright or set up a Quisling regime that he could control.).
Neither side is going to achieve its objectives. Putin is going to get additional territory but has paid an awful price in money, manpower, and international reputation. Ukraine is going to lose some territory but retain access to the sea and its political its independence and that ain't nothin'.

 

[crimsonaudio]

According to a pending document on the U.S. Federal Register site, U.S. President Donald J. Trump is expected to extend the post-2014 sanctions on Russia tomorrow.

 

[Bazza]

U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer on Thursday praised Trump for “changing the conversation to bring about the possibility” of a peace deal between Kyiv and Moscow and presented the president with a letter from the king. | Pool photo by Carl Court

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/27/trump-united-kingdom-state-visit-king-charles-022897

 

[spidermayin]

I agree, this has to end at some point, but what a sickening display from our president and vice president.



CNN Snippet From CNN's Elise Hammond, Kaitlan Collins, Daria Tarasova-Markina, Victoria Butenko, Katharina Krebs, Lauren Kent, Kevin Liptak and Kit Maher
A remarkable shouting match broke out in the Oval Office on Friday between President Donald Trump and his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky, an extraordinarily fractious display that only underscored the deeply uncertain future of American assistance to Kyiv.

Castigating Zelensky for not demonstrating enough gratitude for American support, Trump and his Vice President JD Vance raised their voices, accusing the besieged leader of standing in the way of a peace agreement with Russia as the full-scale invasion has surpassed its third year.

What was said:

“You’re right now, not really in a very good position. You’ve allowed yourself to be in a very bad position,” Trump said. “You don’t have the cards right now. With us, you start having cards.”
“I’m not playing cards,” Zelensky said.
Raising his voice, after more back-and-forth, Trump said, “You’re gambling with the lives of millions of people. You’re gambling with World War III.”
At one moment, Vance accused Zelensky of being “disrespectful” toward his American hosts.
“You’re not acting all that thankful,” Trump added.
“Have you said ‘thank you’ once?” Vance asked Zelensky.

After the meeting: Following the exchange, the two leaders went into separate rooms and Trump ordered the Ukrainians be told to leave, a White House official said. The Ukrainians protested and wanted to continue the talks. But they were told no, a White House official said. A scheduled joint press conference was scrapped and Zelensky departed in his black SUV without signing a planned agreement on providing US access to Ukraine’s rare earth minerals.

Trump and Zelensky’s reactions: Trump posted online that his counterpart was not welcome back until he was “ready for peace.” Zelensky posted on X, “Thank you America, thank you for your support, thank you for this visit. Thank you @POTUS, Congress, and the American people.” Ukraine’s Defense Ministry also reacted on Telegram: “We have our own things to do. Glory to Ukraine.”

Russian reaction: Kirill Dmitriev, a special envoy to Russian President Vladimir Putin, reacted to a video of the exchange on X with one word: “historic.” The headline from Russia state news agency TASS said Zelensky “interrupted, argued and was rude to the press.” A headline by another Russian state media outlet, RIA Novosti, read: “Zelensky’s Hysteria in the White House Shocks the Rada,” referring to the Ukrainian parliament.

Earlier today: Zelensky said he met with a bipartisan US Senate delegation, where the discussion focused on “continued military assistance for Ukraine, relevant legislative initiatives,” his upcoming meeting with Trump and security guarantees. He also said he was “grateful for the unwavering bicameral and bipartisan support.”

 

[crimsonaudio]

As I said in another thread (where I posted video of the shouting match) - it's a terrible look for the POTUS.

That said, Zelenskyy is wanting more military aid, seemingly unwilling to do a peace deal. All three (Zelenskyy, Trump, Vance) came off as clowns, imo.

 

[Bamaro]

As I said in another thread (where I posted video of the shouting match) - it's a terrible look for the POTUS.

That said, Zelenskyy is wanting more military aid, seemingly unwilling to do a peace deal. All three (Zelenskyy, Trump, Vance) came off as clowns, imo.

Trump keeps lying about the aid given to Ukraine so far using the 350B figure (he repeated it during this meeting) that has been proven to be wrong, over and over. The actual figure is about 120B and around 70% of it was for material made in the USA so the money actually stays here.

 

[crimsonaudio]

Trump keeps lying about the aid given to Ukraine so far using the 350B figure (he repeated it during this meeting) that has been proven to be wrong, over and over. The actual figure is about 120B and around 70% of it was for material made in the USA so the money actually stays here.

Agreed, but that doesn't change what I posted. Trump has stated over and over he wants the war to end, but as @Tidewater stated, unless those fighting don't want to stop, there's not a lot that can be done.

 

[75thru79]

around 70% of it was for material made in the USA so the money actually stays here.

The fact that the defense contractor turned a profit manufacturing the weapons/ammo lessens the financial impact some but that doesn't mean dollars weren't taken out of my pocket for it. They most definitely were. Who knows the exact amount but it was in the $billions.

If Zelensky's end goal is to get all of his land back and punish Putin for the affair then he is free to explore that but the U.S. should bow out. The world really needs this war to end and the scenario Zelensky is looking for is not going to happen. His best bet is try to slip someone undercover into Russia and assassinate Putin.

 

[Huckleberry]

Birds of a feather...

 

[jthomas666]

 

[crimsonaudio]

This isn't good vs evil - it's more like evil vs evil.

 

[Bamaro]

Agreed, but that doesn't change what I posted. Trump has stated over and over he wants the war to end, but as @Tidewater stated, unless those fighting don't want to stop, there's not a lot that can be done.

He wants the war to end so he can please Putin. Why is anyone's guess. He dislikes Zelensky and cares little about Ukraine.

 

[crimsonaudio]

He wants the war to end so he can please Putin. Why is anyone's guess. He dislikes Zelensky and cares little about Ukraine.

I know it's popular to think he's beholden to Putin, but I think he understands that the war is dangerous (WWIII) and opening up trade will benefit Americans a lot more than this continued proxy-ish war that's only losing more and more Ukrainian territory each day.

 

[81usaf92]

I know it's popular to think he's beholden to Putin, but I think he understands that the war is dangerous (WWIII) and opening up trade will benefit Americans a lot more than this continued proxy-ish war that's only losing more and more Ukrainian territory each day.

I honestly look at the Russian invasion of Ukraine more like the Winter’s War or Putin’s invasion of Georgia. There will be a point in which it ends and Putin declares victory to save face but ultimately nothing monumental is going to change because no one really wants to have to beat them back to Moscow and St Petersburg and allow the Iranians and Chinese full uninterrupted access to invade their parts of the country just because we want to give Putin a whooping.

What I really fear out of this administration is for Europe and North America to totally turn their backs on us because of how hostile we have became diplomatically towards them. Because any war with China will require international support. And who is to say Europe doesn’t trade the US for China as primary trade partners and military alliances. It’s certainly possible even if it’s not probable

 

[Bamaro]

I know it's popular to think he's beholden to Putin, but I think he understands that the war is dangerous (WWIII) and opening up trade will benefit Americans a lot more than this continued proxy-ish war that's only losing more and more Ukrainian territory each day.

Voting in the UN with Russia and against Eurupe should tell everyone which side trump is on.

 

[4Q Basket Case]

It is beyond me how any American can support Russia or Putin in any way.

I feel strongly on both sides about the concept of carrying on a previous administration's policies... including, but not at all limited to, Russia / Putin. It's a fine line to walk.

Neither our allies nor our enemies should feel that American values can change at each presidential election. That makes everyone unsure of what "American" actually is, undermines our credibility, and as a result, our bargaining power.

But if a previous administration had some boneheaded policies (and they all do), the new administration should modify or discontinue them as needed.

Like I said, a fine line.

 

[UAH]

I honestly look at the Russian invasion of Ukraine more like the Winter’s War or Putin’s invasion of Georgia. There will be a point in which it ends and Putin declares victory to save face but ultimately nothing monumental is going to change because no one really wants to have to beat them back to Moscow and St Petersburg and allow the Iranians and Chinese full uninterrupted access to invade their parts of the country just because we want to give Putin a whooping.

What I really fear out of this administration is for Europe and North America to totally turn their backs on us because of how hostile we have became diplomatically towards them. Because any war with China will require international support. And who is to say Europe doesn’t trade the US for China as primary trade partners and military alliances. It’s certainly possible even if it’s not probable

Perhaps include Canada, Mexico and South America in that. Mexico and Canada will be forced to walk a fine line but if the US is going to be their adversary financially then they will seek alternatives. South America is more aligned with Europe and already hase a close realtionship with China from an agricultural standpoint.

 

[Tidewater]

It is beyond me how any American can support Russia or Putin in any way.

I feel strongly on both sides about the concept of carrying on a previous administration's policies, including, but not at all limited to, Russia / Putin. It's a fine line to walk.

Neither our allies nor our enemies should feel that American values can change at each presidential election. That makes everyone unsure of what "American" actually is, undermines our credibility, and as a result, our bargaining power.

But if a previous administration had some boneheaded policies (and they all do), the new administration should modify or discontinue them as needed.

Like I said, a fine line.

The failure of the Biden Administration is that the US declared "we will send Ukraine limitless amounts of money for them to continue the war as long as Zelensky wants to continue."
That is irrationally subordinating foreign policy to military policy on a scale similar to 1914. Properly understood, military policy supports foreign policy, foreign policy does not serve military policy.
At some point, somebody in Washington should have asked, "War to what end? What are we trying to achieve?" and then the hard discussions could begin as to whether we had matched ends, ways, and means, to ensure we were trying to do the right things, had adopted the best available concepts, and were resourcing those adequately. By simply declaring we will provide open-ended military and economic support for Ukraine, even if their policy is unsound, we were squandering our precious scarce resources (ammunition and money) in a quixotic effort. We cannot afford to do that.
Now, supporting a policy that is articulated, balanced, and properly resourced is fine.
For the Ukrainians to say, "We will keep fighting with the resources we have to regain all of our lost territory including Donbas and Crimea," is to enable bad policy. Someone needed to tell them that is not possible with the resources at hand. While the Ukrainians are free to try, they are not free to try with our resources. We are not obliged to waste our money in their quixotic effort.
We have other responsibilities (e.g. in the Pacific) that others do not share. If we have large Marine and Army forces overrun by the ChiComs because the Marines and Army ran out of ammo, then the same folks bleating today about Ukraine aid will be screaming about Marines (and Taiwan itself) being overrun because the US were not prepared to fight in the Pacific. Same pile of money. Same pile of ammo.
Roger's Rangers' 1759 standing orders: "Have your musket clean as a whistle, hatchet scoured, sixty rounds powder and ball, and be ready to march at a minute's warning." Still sound wisdom.