"All of Vlad's forces and all of Vlad's men, are out to put Humpty together again." (6 Viewers)

[MiTasol]

Let's assume Britain, France, Germany and the other pro-Ukraine Europeans take the gloves off and go full on unlimited support to Zelenskyy. What more can they give between now and say Nov 2025 when the Rasputitsa begins? More artillery, rockets and guided bombs? How many are left to spare? Leopard, Challenger and LeClerc tanks?

If Russia is such dire straights as so many think then if all the non US and Bulgarian members of NATO dropped out of NATO (because while in NATO Trump and/or Bulgaria can veto any NATO action) and form a new ??TO excluding both the US and Bulgaria Hungary but including Ukraine this will be a major world power block far stronger than the current Russia.

They would have the combined political and military power to dictate a ceasefire and the total Russian withdrawal from Ukraine and include the condition that if Putin violates the ceasefire he is up against the whole of the new ??TO. Obviously Canada would like to remain a member and countries like Australia would probably want to join as there is a lot of money to be made rebuilding Ukraine and Ukraine would obviously be supportive of ??TO member investments and be totally rejecting all investments by the US and other non supportive nations.

Edited to correct country.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

[...] then if all the non US and Bulgarian members of NATO dropped out of NATO (because while in NATO Trump and/or Bulgaria can veto any NATO action) [...]

No, no NATO member can veto any other members' decision. Individual members of NATO can choose to intervene in military operations, such as in Desert Storm, but they cannot veto another member's involvement.

Neither Trump, nor Orban (nor Erdogan) can tell any other member what they can or cannot do. Members can only abstain from taking part.

 

[MiTasol]

Okay - I stand corrected. Thank you.

So that leaves the non US members the choice of action but not of inviting other nations as part of the consortium. But the others can join like Aus did in Afghanistan if they want.

 

[GrauGeist]

If Russia is such dire straights as so many think then if all the non US and Bulgarian members of NATO dropped out of NATO (because while in NATO Trump and/or Bulgaria can veto any NATO action) and form a new ??TO excluding both the US and Bulgaria but including Ukraine this will be a major world power block far stronger than the current Russia.

They would have the combined political and military power to dictate a ceasefire and the total Russian withdrawal from Ukraine and include the condition that if Putin violates the ceasefire he is up against the whole of the new ??TO. Obviously Canada would like to remain a member and countries like Australia would probably want to join as there is a lot of money to be made rebuilding Ukraine and Ukraine would obviously be supportive of ??TO member investments and be totally rejecting all investments by the US and other non supportive nations.

You've lost me on Bulgaria.

They are fully behind Ukraine - are you perhaps thinking of Hungary?

 

[MiTasol]

You've lost me on Bulgaria.

They are fully behind Ukraine - are you perhaps thinking of Hungary?

Wow - two senior moments in one post - I must be getting old as well as exhausted.

Yes - you are right and I did mean Hungary.

Thank you.

 

[EwenS]

Let's assume Britain, France, Germany and the other pro-Ukraine Europeans take the gloves off and go full on unlimited support to Zelenskyy. What more can they give between now and say Nov 2025 when the Rasputitsa begins? More artillery, rockets and guided bombs? How many are left to spare? Leopard, Challenger and LeClerc tanks?

I bet that during WW2 no one could have predicted just how enormous the British and US manufacturing capacity would become; you cannot predict how each European country or indeed the rest of the world might rise to the occasion when pressed. Whatever is done, it has to be done without the USA because that door has been shut. The world starts with negotiation, discussion, alignment, discourse, agreement, then it acts.

All very good questions. I don't think I have the info to answer them, but they are very pertinent points and hopefully the Europeans follow up their summit with concrete discussion complete with numbers. My guess would be that they can fill in for ammunition but have problems with heavy equipment not already under build.

They could ramp up production of tanks/planes/arty, but that will take a couple of years would be my guess, between building factories, training workforces, assembling materials, and so on. Bear in mind America had to do this as well in 2022-23.

It is already happening across Europe and elsewhere by European companies.

UK

Britain supplying 5,000 air defence missiles to Ukraine

The deal, say the Government, will deliver on the UK’s commitment to Ukraine and will create hundreds of jobs here in the UK.

ukdefencejournal.org.uk

I'm sure that this contract wasn't cooked up on Saturday after the White House bust up. Negotiations must have been taking place for a while for there to be notes about numbers of new jobs etc. Maybe got accelerated a bit, but the groundwork must have been done.

Rheinmetall of Germany has been quietly expanding its munitions production capacity in various overseas countries for years, with a new plant in India to come online soon.

Arming the world: Rheinmetall’s secretive ammunition factory program

Germany’s leading defence company is a major supplier to Ukraine and ‘friendly’ Nato countries. But Rheinmetall also has a parallel business, free from German export rules, selling machinery and factories to places rarely named in public. Investigate Europe went on the trail of the arms giant’s...

www.investigate-europe.eu

Article about France from April 2024

How the French arms industry is scaling up

Stimulated by the conflict in Ukraine, the defense industry is awakening from its torpor. Orders from the French government are breathing new life into more than 4,000 companies and a dozen major groups.

www.lemonde.fr

A bigger problem is how dependent European countries are on contracts with US partners or where componentry is sourced in the USA. Look at the F-35. BAe Systems and other British companies produce about 15 % of the aircraft including all rear fuselage units, ejector seats, electronics etc. But we don't have a production line. Italy has a production line but depends on components from the US & Britain amongst other things.

Even the Dreadnought SSBN programme is dependent on General Dynamics for the design of the missile compartments and various other elements, which are common with the new USN Columbia class.

Even something like the Saab Gripen which has an engine built by Volvo, it is in fact a derivative of a GE F-404. Who knows what licensing and contractual arrangements are.

These problems are not insurmountable. Witness Dassault changing Super Etendard componentry to avoid US sanctions in the early 1980s and allow their supply to Argentina. But the interdependence is far greater than it was. It seems to me to be a lot harder than in WW2 where subsidiaries of US companies in Europe controlled production of, for example, vehicles from sourcing individual components to rolling them completed off the production line.

So the question is, just how p***ed off Trump is with Europe and how far is he willing to go, remembering that arms exports to Europe are extremely lucrative as exports by US companies. It is however a sword that cuts two ways. I came across this table which is of interest. 20% of UK arms exports go to, drum roll, the USA so affecting the US military.

 

[rochie]

Wow - two senior moments in one post - I must be getting old as well as exhausted.

Yes - you are right and I did mean Hungary.

Thank you.

Happening to us all my friend !

 

[EwenS]

SWMBO pointed this one out that I had missed. Dates back to earlier in the week before Friday's bust up.

https://cybernews.com/entertainment/mar-a-lago-complex-renamed-kremlin-headquarters/

 

[Torch]

https://polanddaily24.com/democrats...eject-the-minerals-deal/global-politics/52503

 

[drgondog]

This is not American peacemaking. This is an American abdication. We've spent 80 years convincing people to entrust their defense to us, and now this administration has thrown that history out the window.

This is the American administration playing Chamberlain's role of locking the country in question out of negotiations, and then harrying Benes -- er, Zelenskyy -- to accept a deal that was made without Ukraine's participation. Not only is it underhanded, it's also a fool's quest, as it relies upon the cooperation of the hostage to make it work.

At least Z refused to play his assigned role and stood up for his country. Hopefully Europe's vocal support will translate in real effect on the battlefield.

Thump - you know better, at least in this respect. South Vietnam and Afghanistan 'entrusted' their defense to us. The list is long of future generations of POTUS not upholding previous commitments. We have put covert boots on the ground since Greece either in defending our guy or taking out their guy. Honor was not among the associated attributes of our interventions - other than Korea. It certainly wasn't in Afghanistan recently.

Trump took steps while in office to provide Ukraine real arms. He also (correctly) warned Germany about NATO and Germany being dependent on Russia for energy needs, correctly foreseeing a possibility that Russia was increasingly untethered economically with respect to Ukraine. He is also steadfastly stating that we will Not put boots on the ground under any conditions. That is a clear message that the steady escalation of US presence via increased sophistication in weapon capability and range will cease. To me it is clear that Zelensky has calculated that by using our weaponry to attack Russia, all the way to Moscow, that he counts on us being there for him in perpetuity. Trump disabused of that last week.

To be clear, I am not particularly fond of Trump's personality but I am 100% behind his vision and execution and demand for transparency and accountability.

Georgia, Crimea and Ukraine 'happened' on other POTUS watch - not his watch. Russian Spetznatz took it in their shorts from US airpower in Syria - unleashed by Trump. Iran was throttled by the sanctions issued by Trump and the Republican Guard took it in the shorts in Iraq - but all those actions vanished with the new guy.

Why weren't you vocal when we vanished in Afghanistan - which arguably was the 'worst ever' in context of US lives left behind and massive arms dump including C-30s and Apache's much less 70,000 vehicles - then cover up the actions and deliberations of the entire chain of command, most recently with a Pardon to Milley. Then to add to the goat fornication, still subsidizing the Taliban via USAID.

To be clear - I have zero love for Russia or Putin. I remember growing up in 40's and 50's and 60's. I remember when I was in Miami during the Cuban missile crisis with my father recently yanked back into 'federal service' at Homestead AFB - with 2xF-105s with nukes on 24x7 on the hot alert pad. I grew up with the real threat of nuclear war and see the signs once again.

Russia blinked over Cuba when our armor and mobile infantry began arriving in Mobile for loading and preparation to invade and they realized we were committed to taking Cuba - independent of the nuclear exchange probability. After that we went back to proxy war biz.

I have also studied the Bear over time and believe the mantra - NATO bordering Russia is an existential threat that will not lead to ' only limited war'. That is the Boundary Condition of any and ALL discussions to avert a nuclear 'exchange'. NATO or US boots on the ground as 'peacekeepers' is putting lipstick on a pig. There is only one solution that I see, namely Putin dies from a mysterious virus that leads back to China. In Putin you have the drive for re-establishing the Russian Empire of old. I am uncertain regarding his acolytes and whether they share his vision and/or leadership. He is the key - not Zelensky.

Be explicit, are you all in for any succeeding escalation with Russia? I actually believe there is a point that demands that we must be fully prepared to accept unlimited war (and MAD) as a potential outcome - but this goat fornication is not it. Russia attacking Poland or Germany would be the trigger and Trump would honor the US obligation IMO. But that would occur only if Putin, like Khruschev, calculates that we (all of NATO) don't have the will.

This is a real question - have the NATO countries collectively put maximum sanctions and economic pressure on Russia and its trading partners? Including sanctions on Iran and Venezuela and China and all other trading partners with Russia?

Final question - what do you propose as next several steps?

 

[Admiral Beez]

There are Americans and there are MAGA politicians. They are not the same. Slava Ukraine.

I stay away from politics on this forum, but on the topic of diplomacy and cross border relations, in this Canadian's POV, since vast majority of eligible American voters either abstained or voted for Trump, which is the same thing - they're all MAGA by default. Only those eligible Americans who voted for Harris can look at Washington's abandonment of Ukraine and the siding with dictators over democracies with a clean conscience.

 

[ThomasP]

re

. . . since vast majority of eligible American voters either abstained or voted for Trump . . .

Not to get too political or pedantic, but Trump only won by about 3% of the popular voting. The Electoral Vote system the US operates under (where all but a couple of the states must provide all of their state's Electoral Votes to their state's popular vote winner) gives the impression of a much larger victory.

 

[GrauGeist]

Wow - two senior moments in one post - I must be getting old as well as exhausted.

Yes - you are right and I did mean Hungary.

Thank you.

No worries - we've all been there.

I remember back when I was a kid, I couldn't wait to grow up - I didn't realize that it was a trap!

 

[ThomasP]

re

Why weren't you vocal when we vanished in Afghanistan - which arguably was the 'worst ever' in context of US lives left behind and massive arms dump including C-30s and Apache's much less 70,000 vehicles

Again, not to be too political or pedantic, but Trump was the one who made the agreement with the Taliban to leave Afghanistan to the Taliban, and to leave in May of 2021. There was nothing (in my opinion) wrong with this as such. After the agreement, the Trump administration periodically issued warnings to the non-military Americans and our allies in Afghanistan to leave by May 2021 - but a very large number did not do so. When Biden took office in early-2021 his administration continued issuing warnings to leave Afghanistan by May 2021. Unfortunately, many of the non-military American idiots in Afghanistan still did not leave, nor did most of our Afghan allies (one reason being opposition to allowing them to come to the US, and a distinct lack of help to do so). The Biden administration negotiated an extension to the original agreement, allowing the remaining American civilians and Afghan allies until August to leave. The Biden administration issued warnings that they had to leave by August - but again some of the Americans still there did not leave, and our Afghan allies were still not allowed to come to the US. The original Trump agreement to leave, the refusal of the non-military Americans and the inability of our Afghan allies to leave (in a very large part due to opposition by US political factions), and the lack of ability of the Biden administration to hunt down, capture, and expel the non-military Americans still in Afghanistan, along with the attempt to give our Afghan allies as much chance to escape as possible within the agreement with the Taliban, is the majority of why our leaving ended the way it did. Please note, that I am not giving the Biden administrations part in the bad ending a free pass, just pointing out that to lay all of the blame against Biden, or even against the Biden administration, is irrational.

re the US vehicles and weapons

All the more sophisticate weaponry was either rendered unusable by the departing US forces or became unusable shortly after our departure due to the built-in failsafe systems and/or lack of spares. Yes, they still have a bunch of armoured cars, M113s, M1117s, trucks, Hummers, etc, running around, and a fair number of small arms such as rifles, MGs, mortars, etc, but that is about it. There may be a few Blackhawk and MD500 still hovering around, but all of the Apaches were disabled by their built-in failsafe systems shortly after we left.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Thump - you know better, at least in this respect. South Vietnam and Afghanistan 'entrusted' their defense to us. The list is long of future generations of POTUS not upholding previous commitments. We have put covert boots on the ground since Greece either in defending our guy or taking out their guy. Honor was not among the associated attributes of our interventions - other than Korea. It certainly wasn't in Afghanistan recently.

I never said we didn't take defeats; we did. We got pushed out of both those countries because we supported very unpopular regimes. This, however, is abject fawning over Kremlin objectives to the detriment of the American national interest.

Trump took steps while in office to provide Ukraine real arms. He also (correctly) warned Germany about NATO and Germany being dependent on Russia for energy needs, correctly foreseeing a possibility that Russia was increasingly untethered economically with respect to Ukraine. He is also steadfastly stating that we will Not put boots on the ground under any conditions. That is a clear message that the steady escalation of US presence via increased sophistication in weapon capability and range will cease. To me it is clear that Zelensky has calculated that by using our weaponry to attack Russia, all the way to Moscow, that he counts on us being there for him in perpetuity. Trump disabused of that last week.

I think he counted on us to be there once we, you know, committed to helping him. He sure didn't count on us breaking our word.

To be clear, I am not particularly fond of Trump's personality but I am 100% behind his vision and execution and demand for transparency and accountability.

I can't answer this without getting banned. Have you noticed that he's only demanding transparency from Zelenskyy, though?

Georgia, Crimea and Ukraine 'happened' on other POTUS watch - not his watch. Russian Spetznatz took it in their shorts from US airpower in Syria - unleashed by Trump. Iran was throttled by the sanctions issued by Trump and the Republican Guard took it in the shorts in Iraq - but all those actions vanished with the new guy.

A broken clock is right twice a day, too. You still don't want to set your schedule by it.

Why weren't you vocal when we vanished in Afghanistan - which arguably was the 'worst ever' in context of US lives left behind and massive arms dump including C-30s and Apache's much less 70,000 vehicles - then cover up the actions and deliberations of the entire chain of command, most recently with a Pardon to Milley. Then to add to the goat fornication, still subsidizing the Taliban via USAID.

I was. I was very vocal in a forum that permits and indeed encourages political discussion, where I was getting vociferous argument over my fierce criticism of the mishandling of that withdrawal ... which, by the way, was agreed-to by your boy here.

To be clear - I have zero love for Russia or Putin. I remember growing up in 40's and 50's and 60's. I remember when I was in Miami during the Cuban missile crisis with my father recently yanked back into 'federal service' at Homestead AFB - with 2xF-105s with nukes on 24x7 on the hot alert pad. I grew up with the real threat of nuclear war and see the signs once again.

Again, I'll get banned if I speak my full mind about this. But if you so dislike Russia why do you support this enabling its objectives?

Russia blinked over Cuba when our armor and mobile infantry began arriving in Mobile for loading and preparation to invade and they realized we were committed to taking Cuba - independent of the nuclear exchange probability. After that we went back to proxy war biz.

...

I have also studied the Bear over time and believe the mantra - NATO bordering Russia is an existential threat that will not lead to ' only limited war'. That is the Boundary Condition of any and ALL discussions to avert a nuclear 'exchange'. NATO or US boots on the ground as 'peacekeepers' is putting lipstick on a pig.

I don't share this belief. I take it you've "read the books" and "watched the shows", though.

There is only one solution that I see, namely Putin dies from a mysterious virus that leads back to China. In Putin you have the drive for re-establishing the Russian Empire of old. I am uncertain regarding his acolytes and whether they share his vision and/or leadership. He is the key - not Zelensky.

I think the only way to deal with a bully is to beat his ass sideways. That's how my father raised me.

Be explicit, are you all in for any succeeding escalation with Russia?

This is a straw-man and so doesn't deserve any reply from me. I've never stood for "any succeeding escalation" and unless you can quote me on it you must rephrase this question if you want an answer.

I actually believe there is a point that demands that we must be fully prepared to accept unlimited war (and MAD) as a potential outcome - but this goat fornication is not it. Russia attacking Poland or Germany would be the trigger and Trump would honor the US obligation IMO. But that would occur only if Putin, like Khruschev, calculates that we (all of NATO) don't have the will.

And somehow you think that abject surrender over Ukraine will signal to Russia we have the will to defend Europe? I've got a big orange bridge you might be interested in buying.

This is a real question - have the NATO countries collectively put maximum sanctions and economic pressure on Russia and its trading partners? Including sanctions on Iran and Venezuela and China and all other trading partners with Russia?

Probably not. But no sanctions are leak-proof, especially when you have India and China buying Russian oil and keeping its economy afloat. Don't be naive.

Final question - what do you propose as next several steps?

Increase the supply of weapons to Ukraine. Extend loan-guarantees so that they can keep their economy going. Take a harder line with Russia over things like Baltic cables or election-meddling. Increase NATO troop levels east of the Oder and Danube, and increase NATO readiness across the board.

Russia has done itself generational harm. Trump's gambit only gives it breathing space. I don't know about you, but when I'm in a race I put the pedal to the metal. We should support Ukraine short of war so long as possible.

 

[ThomasP]

re

Russia blinked over Cuba when our armor and mobile infantry began arriving in Mobile for loading and preparation to invade and they realized we were committed to taking Cuba - independent of the nuclear exchange probability. After that we went back to proxy war biz.

Sorry again, not to be too political or pedantic, but the USSR did not 'blink' at our possibly being willing to send ground forces to invade Cuba. They only agreed to removing the IRBMs in Cuba, and remove the equipment already in place, after we agreed to remove our IRBMs from Turkey and agreed to never attempt to invade Cuba.

The only reason the Soviets decided to install IRBM facilities in Cuba in the first place was because the US had moved IRBMs into Turkey and Italy beginning in early(?)-1961, and decided if it was OK for the US to put such missiles within first-strike range of the Soviet missile fields and major cities, then it was OK for them to do the same re the US missile fields and major cities - with Cuba being the only available appropriate launch site.

This is from Wiki, but it has pretty much all the facts right, with said facts being backed up by historical records in both the US archives and in the Russian (former-Soviet) archives: "Cuban Missile Crisis - Wikipedia"

If anyone 'blinked', it was the US.

 

[buffnut453]

NATO bordering Russia is an existential threat that will not lead to ' only limited war'.

So you're proposing that we should leave democratic nations without the protection of the NATO alliance just because they share borders with Russia? That would only embolden Putin to pressure those countries and potentially take them over, creating mini versions of Belarus as a pseudo Warsaw Pact between Russia and NATO. Is that really what you're suggesting? I'm sure the Finns and Swedes would love that idea.

NATO is not an existential threat to Russia, and Putin KNOWS it. He's just presenting NATO as the bogeyman to justify his dictatorial expansionism.

Russia attacking Poland or Germany would be the trigger and Trump would honor the US obligation IMO.

You have far greater faith in the current administration than I. During his last presidency, he pushed for US forces to pull out of Germany and to relocate HQ USEUCOM to CONUS. During the election campaign, he openly stated that he'd let Russia have a free hand in Europe. I'm far from convinced that the US would fulfill its obligations.

There seems to be perception Stateside that the US is contributing the most, militarily, to NATO. That's nonsense. Yes, the US defence budget dwarfs the NATO Allies but the US is a global superpower and most of that budget is going towards USINDOPACOM. Just look at the number of F-35s in Europe. The US has none/zero/zilch/zip whereas the other NATO nations will bring about 600 once all deliveries are complete.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Not to get too political or pedantic, but Trump only won by about 3% of the popular voting.

Trump's support comes the from the nearly 68% of eligible American who either voted for him (32%) or couldn't GAF either way so skipped the vote (36%). We Canadians are increasingly staying away from US travel both out of reaction to Washington's threats of tariffs and annexation, but also because we're concerned about how we'll be received by the 68% who brough this circumstance about. These 68% of Americans have abandoned Ukraine, the USA's allies, trading partners and friends, the free and democratic world, and sided with dictators and turned US foreign policy into a volatile transactional marketplace where you'll deal with anyone, no matter who they are, what they do or what they stand for, provided there is short-term gain. Those 68% of Americans had the power in their hands to take a different direction, this is on them.

I'll say no more as I'm leaning into politics, beyond to say I am deeply disappointed in my American neighbours, friends and allies. How has the country of Ronald Reagan, where America was the leader of the free world and a beacon of hope for so many come to this?

 

[Ascent]

NATO is such a threat to Russia that they've pulled forces away from the NATO border to use in Ukraine. That's how much they're worried about it.

They know NATO isn't, and has never been, a threat to Russia, only to it's expansionist aims. Trump is repeating Russian propaganda and lies, we know where his sympathies lie.

Anything further would probably get me banned.

 

[ThomasP]

re

Those 68% of Americans had the power in their hands to take a different direction, this is on them.

Agreed.