quote:

Originally posted by Il Cattivo:
A threat or a prediction? It's not as though Zelensky controls the Russian military - Putin does.

Seriously, the spin ain't helping lead anyone to a clearer understanding.

quote:

Originally posted by nharacecraft:
Speculation...It seems fit RIGHT IN here in the 'Idiot Biden War Propaganda' thread.

OK. Here's my source.

http://www.newsweek.com/zelens...war-children-1784657

Where's yours?

quote:

It's amazing how many different ways Uncah Ho is blowing the taxpayers' money - and how many different useless BS programs could be jettisoned to save far more money than the value of what the US has provided to Ukraine.

quote:

Originally posted by IrishWind:
Funny that Comrades NHrace and Chellim are being totally silent that Medvedev, Putin's #2, is saying Russia will have to occupy parts of Poland to secure it's borders.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:

quote:

It's amazing how many different ways Uncah Ho is blowing the taxpayers' money - and how many different useless BS programs could be jettisoned to save far more money than the value of what the US has provided to Ukraine.

Hey, I get it...
Arguing "We can't afford it!" is never effective when discussing the US government because you can always point at so many other ways the federal government blows through mountains of cash that doesn't even really exist.
We will be able to spend in an unlimited fashion... until we can't.

quote:

Crowd erupts in laughter at Russia's top diplomat after he claimed the Ukraine war 'was launched against us'
Rebecca Cohen,John Haltiwanger
Fri, March 3, 2023 at 2:05 PM EST·3 min read

A crowd laughed at Russia's top diplomat when he said the Ukraine war "was launched against us."

An audience member at India's G20 summit shouted "come on!" at Sergey Lavrov during the event.

He was answering a question about Russia's energy strategy moving forward.

Sergey Lavrov, Russia's top diplomat and a close ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin, at a conference in India Thursday said that the war in Ukraine "was launched against us," prompting the crowd to erupt in laughter.

Lavrov was a speaker at India's G20 Summit in New Delhi, leading a session that was part of a "Raisina Dialogue 2023" series. He was in discussion with Sunjoy Joshi, Chairman of the Observer Research Foundation in India, and took questions from the audience.

One audience member asked Lavrov: "How the war has affected Russia's strategy on energy, and will it mark a privilege toward Asia? And if it does, how is India going to feature in it?"

"You know, the war, which we are trying to stop, which was launched against us, using the..." Lavrov began, before being cut off by loud laughter from the crowd.

"...The Ukrainian people, uh, of course, influenced..." Lavrov tried again, before being cut off by more laughter and a shout of "Come on!" from the crowd.

He went on to say that the war has influenced the energy policy in Russia and that they "would not rely on any partners" going forward.

Contrary to Lavrov's claim, Russia launched an unprovoked invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 and sparked the largest military conflict in Europe since World War II.

The Kremlin has offered an array of justifications for the invasion, including the bogus assertion that Ukraine is led by neo-Nazis. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is Jewish and lost family during the Holocaust.

Russia has also blamed NATO, suggesting that the alliance's expansion provoked the conflict. But Ukraine is not a NATO member and was not on track to join the alliance when Russia invaded.

Experts widely agree that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered the invasion of Ukraine out of a desire to restore Russia as an imperial power. Putin, who once described the collapse of the Soviet Union as the "greatest geopolitical catastrophe" of the 20th century, has likened himself to Peter the Great while defending Russia's assault on Ukraine.

The Russian leader has falsely claimed that Ukraine is not a real country, offering a distorted view of history to vindicate Russia's brutal campaign to subjugate its next-door neighbor.

Much of Ukraine was controlled by the Russian Empire before it was later part of the Soviet Union. But Ukrainians in 1991 overwhelmingly voted for independence from the USSR, making it clear that they did not want to be subservient to Moscow.

Russia has been condemned around the world for invading Ukraine, and faces widespread allegations of war crimes.

Read the original article on Business Insider

quote:

Nord Stream investigations: Traces lead to Ukraine

Investigators have identified the boat from which the Nord Stream attacks were carried out. Apparently it was rented by a company owned by Ukrainians.

By Holger Stark

Mar 7, 2023 at 6:03 p.m

The German investigative authorities have apparently made a breakthrough in solving the attack on the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines. Per joint research by [public broadcaster] ARD capital studio, ARD political magazine Kontraste, [public broadcaster] SWR and ZEIT, it was possible to largely reconstruct how and when the explosive attack was prepared in the course of the investigation. According to this, traces lead in the direction of Ukraine. However, investigators have not yet found any evidence as to who ordered the destruction. On the night of September 26, 2022, three of the four strands of the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines on the bottom of the Baltic Sea were destroyed by explosions.

Specifically, according to information of ARD capital studio, Kontraste, SWR and ZEIT, investigators managed to identify the boat that was allegedly used for the secret operation. It is said to be a yacht rented from a company based in Poland, apparently owned by two Ukrainians. According to the investigation, the secret operation at sea was carried out by a team of six people. They are said to have been five men and one woman. Thus, the group consisted of a captain, two divers, two diving assistants and a female doctor, who are said to have transported the explosives to the crime scenes and placed them there. The nationality of the perpetrators is apparently unclear. The attackers used professionally forged passports, which are said to have been used, among other things, to rent the boat.

According to the investigation, the commando set sail from Rostock on September 6, 2022. The equipment for the secret operation was previously transported to the port in a van, it is said. According to the research, the investigators subsequently managed to locate the boat again the following day at Wieck (Darß) and later off the Danish island of Christiansø, north-east of Bornholm. The yacht was then returned to the owner in uncleaned condition. According to the research, investigators found traces of explosives on the table in the cabin. Per information of the ARD capital studio, Kontraste, SWR and ZEIT, a Western intelligence service is said to have sent a tip to European partner services in the autumn, i.e. shortly after the destruction, according to which a Ukrainian commando was responsible for the destruction. After that, there are said to have been further intelligence indications that a pro-Ukrainian group could be responsible.

The ARD capital studio, Kontraste, SWR and ZEIT spoke to sources in several countries for their research. Security authorities in Germany, Denmark, Sweden, the Netherlands and the USA were involved in the investigation into the destruction of the pipelines. In Germany, the Federal Prosecutor General is in charge of the investigation, who has tasked both the Federal Criminal Police Office and the Federal Police. Even if traces lead to Ukraine, the investigators have not yet been able to find out who commissioned the suspected group of perpetrators. In international security circles it is not excluded that this could also be a false flag operation. This means that traces could also have been deliberately laid which point to Ukraine as the culprit. However, the investigators have apparently found no evidence that confirms such a scenario.

The Ukrainian government could not be immediately reached for comment. The Federal Prosecutor General also declined to comment. A German government spokesman referred to the ongoing investigations by the Prosecutor General and the authorities in Sweden and Denmark. Only "a few days ago," Sweden, Denmark and Germany "informed the United Nations Security Council that the investigations are ongoing and that there are still no results," said the government spokesman.

quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:
What makes the US crews lethal is not the tank but the crew.

quote:

2024 GOP Presidential Candidate
@VivekGRamaswamy
answers our Ukraine questionnaire (1/3)

Is opposing Russia in Ukraine a vital American national strategic interest?

“No, it is not “vital.” Rather, this is a stark reminder of what is a vital American national strategic interest: national energy independence. This war is a symptom of America’s lack of self sufficiency. Putin is a tyrant and started this needless war, but he did so because we created incentives that tipped the balance of his decision-making in favor of invading: if he knows the West relies on him to provide oil and gas (because the U.S. and Western Europe have self-inflicted limitations on their own ability or willingness to produce), then Putin is in a stronger position–and that led him to think he could win. The Biden Administration weakened our energy security, which created the conditions for Putin to invade Ukraine, which is of course an undesired outcome. Biden, in turn, responded by calling for more oil and gas production, pretty much everywhere in the world other than in the U.S. itself.

The more America is reliant on foreign energy and oil, the less leverage we have with petro dictators.

The Europeans need to be the main upholders of European security. The Europeans, starting with the Germans, need to do more for themselves. Unfortunately, the Germans chose to ‘go green’ on energy, and so they’re looking to us to shoulder the load on Ukraine, as well as defense in general. We spend close to 4 percent of our GDP on defense, and the Germans spend barely over 1 percent. Ukraine is in their backyard, not ours. If the Germans and other European countries can’t or won’t produce their own energy, they should buy natural gas from Louisiana and Texas—and from Pennsylvania and my home state of Ohio.
Foreign policy is all about prioritization, my top two foreign policy priorities are to Declare Independence from Communist China and to annihilate the Mexican drug cartels.

The main thing should be the main thing: focus on China. China wants the Ukraine war to last as long as possible to deplete Western military capacity before invading Taiwan. It’s working: we think we appear stronger by helping Ukraine, but we actually become weaker vis-à-vis China.

We’ve spent 20 years droning people in caves in the Middle East and Central Asia and have little to show for it. We should be taking out the people who have caused the death of more than 100,000 Americans every year–the Mexican drug cartels.”

What specifically is our objective in Ukraine, and how will we know when we’ve achieved it?

“Our objective in Ukraine should be to respect any prior legal treaty commitments the U.S. has made, so as to preserve our credibility when it comes to commitments in the future, which I believe we have already fulfilled – and indeed gone beyond. (I make a clear distinction between commitments to which Congress was made aware and approved, and whatever secret deals the Biden administration might have cooked up.)

The Budapest Memorandum, signed by Russia, Ukraine, the U.S. and the U.K., was supposed to assure Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons, a massive stockpile, and received security protections–but not an alliance or pledge to go to war, just a commitment to respect the sovereignty of existing borders. Whether that was the right decision to make in 1994 is a point of reasonable debate, but it is in our long-term self interest to stick by our word. And we have.

But now it’s time to move on.”

“A key objective has already been achieved by revealing Russia to be a “paper tiger.” Russia’s military capabilities are far weaker than the U.S. defense establishment previously had assumed (their track record of being blatantly wrong about “intelligence” assessments only grows each year): recall how they predicted that Ukraine would fall within days–the same defense establishment who wrongly predicted that Kabul would not fall to the Taliban. Time to find a different term for our “intelligence experts.”

Our second objective is to deter Putin from aggression against other European nations, including NATO powers. But we can achieve that goal in part by guaranteeing America’s energy independence, which our own President has unilaterally undermined. It is stunning that Biden lobbied against the EU adopting its Russian oil ban, while simultaneously sending $113 billion in aid to Ukraine to fight against Russia. In other words: Biden helps fund Putin’s war machine with one hand, and yet he sends money to Ukraine with the other. More importantly, if you want to deter Putin from invading Poland, then move the idle tens of thousands of troops we have from Germany into Poland to send a signal - not by fighting a war in Ukraine.

A third objective is nudging—shaking, if necessary—the Europeans to take care of themselves. I believe in America First 2.0, and we should at least get the Europeans to Europe First 1.0. We actively undermine this very objective by offering a bottomless pit of aid to Ukraine.”

What is the limit of funding and material you would be willing to send to the government of Ukraine?

“Generally speaking, I don’t think it’s wise to telegraph our ends, and I believe the facts in January 2025 may be very different from where they are today. But let me be clear: if I were president right now, I would limit any further funding or support to Ukraine.

Ukraine isn’t in the top five of American foreign policy priorities right now, and yet merely questioning whether the money we’ve spent on the war is being done effectively or perhaps even prolonging the war is seen as disloyal. We get accused by both Democrats and Republicans of being “Putin sympathizers.” The Washington uni-party and defense contractors want this conflict to go on forever; for the sake of the global economy and peace, we should be doing everything we can to end it tomorrow.

As I mentioned, Biden gives $113 billion in aid to Ukraine while he lobbied against the EU ban on Russian oil imports on the other hand. The U.S. has shot itself in the foot with its own production capabilities. It’s unclear who wins this game, but the loser is clear: America.

I’ll say again: the Europeans need to do more, a lot more — it’s their backyard, it’s their borders. The Europeans have gotten used to freeloading, and we know what happens to freeloaders — they become dependent, even lazy. We can’t be the nanny of Europe forever; we have too much to take care of here at home. We have a swiss-cheese of a southern border that pours in fentanyl killing hundreds of thousands of Americans every year. It’s time to secure our border before taking care of someone else’s. This would be an appropriate and morally justified use of military force: secure our southern border and annihilate the drug cartels responsible for countless American deaths on our own soil.

We’ve discovered a big problem on our end—the weakness of our industrial base. I’m disturbed by reports that our aid to Ukraine has drained away munitions and other material that we could potentially need for our own defense.”

“There is opportunity cost in depleting these defense resources–especially in protecting our own soil and border from Mexican cartels or in the case of Communist China. Critics of this view would say that these defense capabilities are different–that we need enhanced naval capabilities to counter China and defend Taiwan. That’s a hubristic view that we shouldn’t indulge when we have major future unknowns–opportunity costs are opportunity costs, period.”

Should the United States support regime change in Russia?

“No. We’ve seen this movie before–Libya, Yemen, Afghanistan, the list goes on. History shows the U.S. is abysmal at effectuating regime change. And, even when we do, we usually end up regretting it. Regime change is riddled with unintended consequences. The bigger risk we need to worry about is driving Putin into Xi’s hands. Our policies are having precisely that effect right now.”

Given that Russia’s economy and currency are stronger than before the war, do you believe that U.S. sanctions have been effective?

“Clearly not. Russia is stronger because of higher oil and gas revenue owing to higher prices. The lesson for the U.S. and the West should be to abandon the climate cult that shackles the West while leaving Russia and China untouched. We restrict our own energy while the Russians and Chinese go pedal-to-the-metal on their own energy, including coal. The Biden administration jovially sacrifices our energy dominance on the altar of green goals—some mythical target in the far future that the world will never hit. As President I will end that foolish and self-destructive game.”

Do you believe the United States faces the risk of nuclear war with Russia?

“The risk of nuclear war goes up the more that China begins to back Russia - which is happening now before our eyes. This is the #1 risk factor to the U.S. taking an aggressive posture towards Russia while going soft on China: we drive Putin straight into Xi Jinping’s hands.

The foreign policy establishment has demonstrated weakness time and time again when it comes to Russia–including in our nuclear arms negotiations with the Russian Federation, which continues even now. Putin and the Russians, and the Soviets before them, not only brazenly violated every nuclear arms control treaty we have with them, but the U.S. gives up any semblance of negotiating leverage. It’s humiliating. The Trump Administration, rightly, began to walk away from the New START Treaty as the Biden Administration swooped in and stopped that process, squandering all negotiating power and absurdly signed a five-year extension.

Russia may be a third-world gas station with an economy the size of Pennsylvania. But, they are a third world gas station with more nuclear warheads than any other nation on the planet, including the U.S. The global defense establishment must dig its head out of the sand and buck up to the fact that China, who is not constrained by any nuclear arms treaty, is secretly building up its nuclear stockpile. They are nearing nuclear parity.

For these reasons, it serves US national security interests to move ahead with full-spectrum missile defense to protect US soil. We cannot afford a bottomless pit of military spending and need to focus on the priorities that actually advance our national defense interests.”

quote:

Former VP
@Mike_Pence
answers our Ukraine questionnaire

Is opposing Russia in Ukraine a vital American national strategic interest?

“When the United States supports Ukraine in their fight against Putin, we follow the Reagan doctrine, and we support those who fight our enemies on their shores, so we will not have to fight them ourselves. There is no room for Putin apologists in the Republican Party. This is not America’s war, but if Putin is not stopped and the sovereign nation of Ukraine is not restored quickly, he will continue to move toward our NATO allies, and America would then be called upon to send our own.

Vladimir Putin has revealed his true nature, a dictator consumed conquest and willing to spend thousands of lives for his commitment to reestablish the Greater Russian Empire. Anyone who thinks Putin will stop at Ukraine’s border is not owning up to the reality of who Putin is. We need to be clear-eyed about the Russian threat: that Georgia, the Crimea, and Ukraine are merely at the top of Putin’s lists, they are not the only countries he’s aiming for. And by supporting Ukraine, we have told China we will support Taiwan, should they follow Russia in an attempt to invade.”

What specifically is our objective in Ukraine, and how will we know when we’ve achieved it?

“Victory for Ukraine, where Ukraine’s sovereignty and peace are restored as quickly as possible. Unfortunately, the Biden administration slow walked aid to Ukraine, every response has been too slow from providing intelligence to Ukraine, to hammering Russia with sanctions, to providing military equipment and fighter jets to Ukraine.

Ukraine’s victory should be an unmistakable, undeniable defeat for Russia and its allies.”

What is the limit of funding and material you would be willing to send to the government of Ukraine?

“As a fiscal conservative, I do not believe in sending blank checks and want oversight of government spending at home and abroad. But withholding or reducing support will have consequences: If Putin is not stopped now and he moves into NATO-controlled territory, the cost will be far greater.”

Should the United States support regime change in Russia?

“That is a better question for the thousands of Russian citizens jailed for protesting the Russian invasion of Ukraine. As many as 200,000 Russian troops have been killed or wounded in Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, that question should be asked to those families grieving their loss, ask if they’d support a regime change.”

Given that Russia’s economy and currency are stronger than before the war, do you believe that U.S. sanctions have been effective?

“The Trump-Pence administration established a devastating sanctions program and was the toughest US administration on Russia since the Cold War. Sanctions against Russia could have had even more painful consequences if the Biden administration moved quicker with new sanctions and western Europe had heeded US warnings to look elsewhere for energy sources.

Russia’s economy and currency are not stronger than before the war. The Russian economy is in free-fall. The Russian ruble is still afloat because of the extremely costly measures Russia has taken to keep their currency at pre-war levels in the face of sanctions. Russia is currently being propped up by China, and if China withdraws their support, Putin could run out of money by as soon as 2024; Russia is not in a strong economic position. This war is costing Russia their economy, their military prowess, their position on the world stage, and it’s costing lives.”

Do you believe the United States faces the risk of nuclear war with Russia?

“Putin is still “the small and bullying leader of Russia,” his talk of nuclear war is a bullying tactic that he used at the start of the invasion. But Putin should know the United States will not be bullied. This administration has not led with strength on the world stage, but America is still a nation that believes peace comes through strength.”