"All of Vlad's forces and all of Vlad's men, are out to put Humpty together again." (5 Viewers)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules





We should be in a period of serious rearmament, not apathy and complacent 'business and assumption as normal'. I can't see how that can be any less obvious. The parallels to the 1930s seem clear enough to me.
I think many/most European/NATO (and beyond - Australia for example) nations realise that an increase in Defence spending /capability/capacity is required. Look at recent comments from NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte calling for increased spending. The issue with comments from trump though is that they carry an implied "or else" (anyone need reminding re his comments re encouraging Russia to do"whatever the hell they want"?) This is the part (especially when combined with other comments) that in unacceptable and comes across as blackmail. Mobster diplomacy is unacceptable.
 
Frightening. Won't the world be more fun when this tech is more readily available?
 
I think many/most European/NATO (and beyond - Australia for example) nations realise that an increase in Defence spending /capability/capacity is required. Look at recent comments from NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte calling for increased spending. The issue with comments from trump though is that they carry an implied "or else" (anyone need reminding re his comments re encouraging Russia to do"whatever the hell they want"?) This is the part (especially when combined with other comments) that in unacceptable and comes across as blackmail. Mobster diplomacy is unacceptable.
We either shift for ourselves on defence then - or do nothing and risk seeing America withdraw interest, commitment and money and like Europe in the 30s, do too little, too late and in an uncoordinated way.

I don't like his approach either. But he DOES have an undeniable point. Those GDP defence figures speak entirely for themselves. And vague promises of possible higher spending in the sometime vague future clearly won't cut it with him OR Putin either. I don't think they convince ANY of the defence chiefs across the various nation's armed forces, either, do they?

You can call it mobster diplomacy if you want - but what can anyone actually do about it, and what does he care anyway!?

I somehow think he doesn't give a flying #*£$ about European disapproval. He's a disruptor, he's a brinksman and several far less flattering adjectives. But there he is, elected soon to be leader of the world's most powerful military power and lynchpin of NATO. I don't think angry letters or a hard-hitting sticker campaign which are about the only options are going to achieve very much, do you? Besides which, the rest of Europe is also going to have to manage his threat of looming tariffs and the inevitable trade war that will bring. Equitable diplomatic and economic relations are not what he's interested in.

A realistic assessment of the actuality of the situation and a rapid practical response is urgently needed. Unfortunately, Europe and the wider flung parts of NATO are - as ever in recent history - farting about with a long list of excuses for inaction and another chunk of cosy assumptions that things will quickly revert back to business as usual.

We have, I deeply suspect, crossed a Rubicon. So it seems to me that for the time being (and urgently!) we either man up collectively and get on with what needs to be done, or we put up, shut up, live with the consequences and whine about them afterwards (if we even have that liberty)

Are there really any other alternatives to that stark choice?

In the meantime:

"Each one hopes that if he feeds the crocodile enough, the crocodile will eat him last. All of them hope that the storm will pass before their turn comes to be devoured. But I fear greatly that the storm will not pass. It will rage and it will roar ever more loudly, ever more widely."
 
Last edited:
Russian commanders resist Putin's orders -- refuse to send troops across Dnipro River


''...Intelligence suggests that around 2,000 assault troops and approximately 300 speedboats have been assembled in the Kherson region. Yet, many high-ranking officers view the proposed attack as a death sentence and are hesitant to deploy their soldiers and resources, according to the ATESH partisan group. They shared on their Telegram channel: "Russian military commanders refuse to send their subordinates to assaults in the Kherson region..."
 
Russian commanders resist Putin's orders -- refuse to send troops across Dnipro River


''...Intelligence suggests that around 2,000 assault troops and approximately 300 speedboats have been assembled in the Kherson region. Yet, many high-ranking officers view the proposed attack as a death sentence and are hesitant to deploy their soldiers and resources, according to the ATESH partisan group. They shared on their Telegram channel: "Russian military commanders refuse to send their subordinates to assaults in the Kherson region..."
This speaks volumes - when regular Russian elements defy a direct order, which is virtually unheard of.

And you just know that the Ukrainians are over there, just waiting for them.
 
We either shift for ourselves on defence then - or do nothing and risk seeing America withdraw interest, commitment and money and like Europe in the 30s, do too little, too late and in an uncoordinated way.
I think the real risk is that no matter what is done the risk is high that the USA will go increasingly isolationist under the new regime. Besides there are too many Putin apologists/admirers there.

the world's most powerful military power and lynchpin of NATO.
And herein lies the problem if the USA decides to turn its back on NATO which is a distinct possibility

Besides which, the rest of Europe is also going to have to manage his threat of looming tariffs and the inevitable trade war that will bring. Equitable diplomatic and economic relations are not what he's interested in.
Tariffs and trade wars hurt everyone. Anyone who believes they can "win" are complete morons.
 
I think the real risk is that no matter what is done the risk is high that the USA will go increasingly isolationist under the new regime. Besides there are too many Putin apologists/admirers there.



And herein lies the problem if the USA decides to turn its back on NATO which is a distinct possibility



Tariffs and trade wars hurt everyone. Anyone who believes they can "win" are complete morons.

Post justifies reposting and bears repeating.
 
I somehow think he doesn't give a flying #*£$ about European disapproval. He's a disruptor, he's a brinksman and several far less flattering adjectives. But there he is, elected soon to be leader of the world's most powerful military power and lynchpin of NATO.

If the US does pull out of NATO it will become a much less powerful military power and the worlds power groups in order will be China, EU including Ukraine, with Russia and the US. The US will be severely degraded because it will lose its current instant access to all the Ukrainian weapons developments and intel whereas the EU will not and will tell the US to go to hell when they ask for access. Ukraine may also cut the US off from rare critical minerals that are mined there as that is about all they can do to retaliate.

If Ukraine is left out of EU in the power rankings then Ukraine, Russia and the US will be fighting to be #3.

Furthermore when the war is eventually over US businesses will not get preferred nation access to any of Ukraine's natural resources and will not be preferred suppliers for rebuilding and re-equipping the military or the civil work.


Americans also need to consider the possible unintended consequences of the promised high tariffs on Chinese goods on the US military and economy.

If China cuts off the US access to rare earth metals - the VAST majority of which come from China (and a lot come from Ukraine) - in retaliation where will the US be 90 days later. With no ability to manufacture computer chips there will be no vehicle manufacture, no aircraft and weapons manufacture, etc, etc, etc and instead of invading Panama like the great white chief proposes he will be begging Panama to send foreign aid to the US.
 
Last edited:
 
I get it that the U.S. and it's policy makers have a direct influence on Putin's "special operation" and can be very relevant to this thread, but can we try to avoid personal views about policies and/or policymakers (U.S. or otherwise) because this is where the conversation gets out of control.
Its an observation and a question more than an opinion, but *perhaps* an unwillingness by certain populations to engage, discuss and consider the detail of the global implications of policy formed by these policy makers, lies at the very core of why certain individuals have ended up being given such power in the first place?

Personally I feel that not discussing the power-brokers policy means it becomes impossible to have an intelligent conversation about the subject when, as you point out, US policy will be the ultimate decider of the fate of Ukraine. Its indivisible. As is its global impact.

What we all know is really meant, given expressing views and opinions about anyone else doesn't seem to result in 'out of control conversations', is not expressing an opinion on Trump and his administration. It'll be interesting to see what passes that test for 'discussion' here, post 20th of January!

Your forum, your rules, by which I will abide! (But perhaps not as a participant on this thread.)
 
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back