An opinion piece from The Wall Street Journal:
===============================

To End the Ukraine War, Shut Up About Negotiations

A good idea months ago would have been pushing aside Russia’s gossamer, largely hypothetical military blockade of Ukraine’s ports. The West finally had a chance this week when Vladimir Putin sought to revive the illusion of a blockade in Western minds by backing out of a U.N.-sponsored grain-shipping agreement. Result: He climbed down when other parties decided the ships would sail anyway.

Lesson: Pay due regard to Mr. Putin’s well-honed capacity for retreat.

Elon Musk and progressive Democrats have also learned a useful lesson lately. Nothing is more personally gaseous than to be heard calling for negotiations when the moment is unripe.

Most interesting is the fallout from a now-withdrawn letter by House progressives urging negotiations on the Biden administration. Our elites aren’t as incompetent as they seem. Ninety-nine percent of the people in Washington know their jobs well enough to know the letter was a bad idea.

The same is true of House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy’s unnecessary statement that Ukraine won’t get a blank check, not that anybody advocated a blank check. Nothing in the letter or Mr. McCarthy’s statement needed to be said now or at all. The episodes served only as a signal to Mr. Putin to keep doing what he’s doing because it’s working—a signal that collective Washington came together to rescind.

That said, an ugly deal still may be coming. It may be more or less ignominious. It may be more or less favorable to Ukraine’s interests. To those who fret about a wilting of Western resolve under energy or inflationary pressure, one comfort will be: No settlement now can save Mr. Putin from being deeply underwater on his Ukraine venture. It’s been a debacle. Nobody envies his position, admires his judgment or thinks his military is competent.

Joe Biden wonders what off-ramp Mr. Putin sees for himself, as if the Russian leader could hope to pull a real-world rabbit out of a real-world hat. He needs a TV rabbit and TV hat, ones he can present back home as a resolution, likely involving some cosmetic concession to the Kremlin’s varying and inconsistent claims about how Ukraine endangers its vital interests.

Mr. Biden perplexingly also suggested that any use of a nuclear weapon must lead to Armageddon. In reality, nobody is obliged to do any particular thing if Russia were to detonate a nuke in Ukraine. And depending on the details, the right response might be to keep on keeping on. Though interpreting Mr. Biden remarks is risky, he may have sent a useful signal to Mr. Putin that, no, detonating a nuke won’t get you negotiations on terms you will like.

Mr. Putin’s situation is not Hitler’s; invading armies aren’t laying waste to his country, looking to drag him back to Stalin for interrogation and show trial.

Ukraine understandably might wish to see Russia transformed, broken up, subjected to a revolution— but a Ukrainian army won’t be rolling into Moscow to make it happen.

Nothing in the present scenario points to nuclear war between superpowers as much as many find it useful to invoke the risk of nuclear war as negotiations begin to shimmer in the distance.

Perhaps less than serendipitously, a fairly conventional new history of the Cuban missile crisis by Max Hastings has been landing in pundit in-boxes. Spare a moment for last year’s account of the same episode by Ukrainian historian Serhii Plokhy. It contains a fetching account of dealings between Bobby Kennedy and the KGB’s Yuri Barsukov in the 1960 election, which later had Khrushchev bragging to a scientific delegation that he elected JFK.

The book shows, with accidents and confusion happening all around them, the protagonists still trying to understand each other’s political needs as the missile crisis unfolded. Recall that

An ugly deal is probably coming but learn the right lessons from the Cuban missile crisis.

Kennedy controlled the war decision, with his threat of invading Cuba, at a time when he knew the U.S. possessed overwhelming nuclear superiority.

Kennedy wanted to avoid nuclear war as much as Khrushchev did, but still nuclear war was a more plausible option for one party than it is for either today.

Of course, the big lacuna in deterrence theory is how to deter the idiot or, say, the leader who badly understands his own position. In ways we may never know, Mr. Putin’s blunder in Ukraine might even be a lucky break for the world at a time when Xi Jinping is seizing total power in China and is mouthing threats about Taiwan.

For now, the U.S. approach seems straightforward. Provide weapons to help Ukraine reclaim territory and defend its airspace. Make it clear to Ukraine’s leadership where our risk limits lie while keeping Mr. Putin in the dark about the same. A last thought: If the war is still ongoing by the 2024 election, whether or not Donald Trump is the GOP candidate, expect the U.S. intelligence establishment for the third time in a row to play an oversized role in our presidential election, mostly for ill.

BUSINESS WORLD

By Holman W. Jenkins, Jr.

LINK

Interesting piece in ISW. Over October, Putin and Co. ramped up the nuclear rhetoric. Ukraine didn't cave and go to the negotiating table to take whatever BS "deal" Russia wanted to offer, and the West wasn't buffaloed into cutting support for Ukraine or trying to get Ukraine to go to the negotiating table for a lousy deal.

Now, Medvedev and the Patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church are still claiming that giving up the territories seized from Ukraine would create an existential crisis for Russia.

http://www.yahoo.com/news/patr...-very-175356415.html

But Putin, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and other Russian nabobs seem to be just about systematically de-escalating the nuclear rhetoric. The Defense Ministry even made a point of calling around to its counterparts to tell them a nuclear attack was simply not going to happen.

Theories abound as to why, but Russia was being urged to back off on nukes by several countries, including China. One thing does seem probable, though - after all the waffling, the innuendo, and now this round of reassurances, Russia can't expect nuclear threats to drive the West and Ukraine into negotiations. Without there being a use for the threat, it's hard to see what use there could possibly be for nukes in the present conflict.

Original text, with linked citations at the bottom, at:

http://www.understandingwar.or...ssessment-november-6

Regardless of your stance on American politics... Russia grinding themselves into oblivion in Ukraine is a good thing IMO.

1. It provides real world testing of our weapons (on our timetable, and of our choosing) against exactly the weapons they were designed to fight against). And even if not against Russia, they are the other primary exporter of weapons so if our military was going to fight anyone, they have a high chance of using Russian weapons or copies.

2. Combined with sanctions, they aren't going to be able to replace losses for a long time. That means that not only are they going to be weakened, they won't be able to export weapons to the enemies of the US until they replenish their own. Less weapons send to US enemies is a good thing.

3. The invasion IS bullshit, built on false premises, and anyone can see it.

4. It's gonna open up some eyes of citizens to the Russian propaganda. I have talked to lots of very patriotic Russians. They have been spoon fed the typical party line nonsense. Losing their ass here exposes their government as liars to the people they are lying to.\

5. Putin is NO ONE's friend. He's a relic leftover from the KGB, who was our enemy. He wants the old ways an and is a true believer is old school USSR style politics. That's then polar opposite of what our country stands for.

6. It will push more countries to the NATO alliance and bring more allies into the fold. More trading partners, more partners for the coming war against China. Trust me, we are gonna have to fight China in the next 100 years, and probably MUCH sooner. The bigger to allied group, the better that conflict will turn out.

Kevin nails it. We can all agree Biden and co are bad for the US, and Putin knows Biden is a weak leader and used this weakness to invade Ukraine. But as bad as Biden is, he'll be out of office in two years. Putin will still be around, and other nations, especially China, need to see that using their military to seize land will not be tolerated.

Oh snap. This is all falling apart for the Russkies if their troops are now doing this:

The pieces are starting to fall into place to make a documented argument that the Russians are deliberately trying to manipulate Republicans into knee-jerk opposition to American support for Ukraine. The article shows that Russian insiders (Prigozhin is merely the most voluble since he's trying to shove his way into a higher position) see it as a deliberate and ongoing effort, and are focused on crippling support for Ukraine in Congress. The net effect - at this point - is to split the Republicans at a moment when they need to be united to counter Biden's foolishness at home.

http://www.yahoo.com/news/russ...ing-u-115844580.html

I don't argue that there's no such thing as principled opposition to our support for Ukraine.

But if you oppose it, then oppose it for your own reasons. Don't be a sucker for the Russians and their propaganda. No one on the other side is telling you to blindly believe what the Ukrainians or Biden are saying.

^^^^^ It's an excellent time to study Sun Tzu's The Art Of War LINK TO CLICK

If you've never read The Art Of War, do it. Even the cliff notes version is an eye/mind opener and food for thought and learning more.

Dude was brilliant.
.

quote:

Originally posted by Il Cattivo:
The pieces are starting to fall into place to make a documented argument that the Russians are deliberately trying to manipulate Republicans into knee-jerk opposition to American support for Ukraine.

Oh, get out: Russian Communists (in all but name) trying to influence US politics by dividing the Right in favor of our home-grown Communists—and themselves? How ridiculous.

^^^But it says so, right there in the link from yahoo news...NOT, not even close!

^^ What exactly are you trying to say?

And, FWIW, the article shows that the original source is Reuters.

I'm saying that the yahoo news link you posted does not support the claims in your previous post. There are NO pieces 'falling into place'. The only thing in that article that even references 'election interference' is the following, and it's the 'opinion' of a professor of Russian politics at King's College...In NO way does it support a 'documented argument'!

quote:

Commenting on attempts by Russian trolls and bots to influence the election, Sam Greene, a professor of Russian politics at King's College in London, said he thought the goal was to try to shape the agenda on Ukraine that Republicans will pursue after the vote.

"(The aim is) to get the (Republican) base clamouring for a drawdown in U.S. support for Ukraine," Greene wrote on Twitter.

But he said he thought that was "a tall order" given the party's lack of a consolidated position on the Ukraine war.

"Half want to bash Biden for supporting Ukraine, the other half for not supporting Ukraine enough," said Greene.

The 'Russians' have been trying to influence our elections for the past 40+ years...There's nothing new about that. Whether we're talking the current mid-term election, 2020, 2016, or any election as far back as I can remember, it's certainly nothing new. Unfortunately, our government does the same...

Honestly pretty much anything 'reported' by yahoo news (or Reuters now that you add that qualifier) should be considered propaganda itself until verified by a reliable source anyway, as they're aligned with the legacy 'state media'. IMO they should never be a first source on anything!

I do find it funny that people are quick to dismiss reports from established media (even if left wing) but when asked to back up their sources, most of the time it is either a Kremlin publication, or some blogger that a quick internet search shows their connection to Moscow. I do find the reporting from Fox, CNN, BBC, ect. a lot more reliable than RT or the other propaganda arms Putin employs.

Our media is broken to the point that citing sources is meaningless. The legacy media fits the definition of propaganda. At least many of the foreign news sources can be immediately recognized as unreliable. There are still folks who believe The New York Times is the paper of record.

quote:

Originally posted by nhracecraft:
I'm saying that the yahoo news link you posted does not support the claims in your previous post.

Well, now wait a minute. I said the pieces are starting to fall into place to make the argument, and the article itself said more than "some British professor says".

What the article said is

- The Russians are openly admitting to attempting to interfere with the current elections

- The Russians have said they would like to see us reduce aid to Ukraine

- According to the Brit professor, Russian-sponsored trolls and bots are trying to get the Republican base "clamoring" for a drawdown in U.S. support for Ukraine

- To whatever extent the trolls and bots are successful, the trolls and bots will split Republicans opposed to aiding Ukraine from those who support it, even though the clumsiness of the Russian troll and bot campaign may turn some Republicans off

I understand your hesitation to trust the US media, but you yourself said Russians have been trying to do interfere with American elections for the last 40 years. Do you have some reason to believe they're not trying to gin up Republican opposition to US aid for Ukraine in this election?

I am glad our country would never interfere with another's election. This is normal routine and has been going on forever. All countries engage in it and why would they not ? Is this news to anyone ?

ETA: Sorry, I guess it was news to you.

The American media is disgusted that someone else is putting a finger in their pie...they want to be the only folks influencing our elections. Crazy Russians might upset the apple cart.

quote:

Originally posted by oldbill123:
I am glad our country would never interfere with another's election. This is normal routine and has been going on forever. All countries engage in it and why would they not ? Is this news to anyone ?

ETA: Sorry, I guess it was news to you.

I know, seriously...

The US.gov seems to 'interfere' in elections almost anywhere and everywhere if the 'Deep State' thinks it's a good idea! In fact, we 'interfered' in the election in Brazil just this year! Name a country in Central America we haven't 'interfered' in. How about the Middle East, Libya anyone? We even went so far as to engineer a coup in Ukraine! Heck, under BHO we even interfered in and/or influenced the election(s) in Israel, and they're one of our allies!

Come across the border illegally. Get to California, New York, or Chicago. Apply and receive driver's license. Automatically registered to vote. Encouraged to vote and no one will prosecute if caught. The Democrats pick up extra House seats based on population. Estimated 2 to 4 extra seats in California due to illegal population.
Subverting our elections is also a home grown business. Start there before complaining about foreign interference.

^^^Yup, but that's a different thread...

The long-anticipated Russian retreat from the Kherson district north of the Dniepro River appears to have gone down; troops blew the Antonovsky Bridge behind them after withdrawing from Kherson City, one of two fixed crossings in the area. For once, this was an orderly fallback, with 20,000 troops and 3,500 vehicles claimed evacuated while Ukraine held back, merely seizing abandoned positions.

The latter said they were wary of being sucked into a trap, particularly in Kherson City, though there are also suggestions that there was some behind-the-scenes deal to effect the handover with as little bloodshed as possible. Or if you listen to disappointed hardcore ex-pro-Russian nutters, it's all part of a staged play for the Great Reset, and Putin has always been in cahoots with Klaus Schwab.