Here is the dipsh*t quote of the year

Quote:

---

“The Russian people don’t need a war with Ukraine. They don’t need their sons coming home in body bags. They don’t need another foreign adventure. What they need is better healthcare, build back better, roads, schools, economic opportunity.”

---

Senior Administration Official on U.S. Diplomatic Engagement Regarding Our Ongoing Commitment to Ukraine’s Sovereignty, Territorial Integrity, and Independence - United States Department of State

A whole interview was published and released on the State Dept web site by an unnamed " senior Administration official". That is a problem in itself . What happened ? Was that official too embarrassed by that nonsense to have the name of the official released ?

Americans don't want Build Brandon Better . What makes this official think the Russians want it ? Maybe annexing Ukraine is Putin's idea of building Russia back better . He did say that the dissolution of the Soviet Union was a tragedy . Does this unnamed official think Putin gives a Rat's A$$ what the people of Russia want ?

When was the last time the State Dept,or Clueless ,or the compliant press mentioned the Budapest Memorandum in discussions regarding Russia's pressure campaign against Ukraine . That was the agreement in 1994 where Ukraine would return Soviet nukes to Russia in exchange for Russia honoring Ukraine independence.

He did not honor that . But no problem because his real concerns are for a Russian build back better . There must be a lot of JFKerry disciples left at State . Of course you remember when he said of Putin in 2014 “You just don’t in the 21st century behave in 19th-century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped up pretext.”

Well clearly time and time again that is exactly how Putin ,and Xi and many other despot leaders of the world behave. For our State Department to naively believe otherwise is dangerous to American security .

Turns out Clueless Joe wants to make Build Brandon Better an international movement

Here is Under Sec State Victoria Nuland making the case for Russia to BBB

"the Kremlin has to justify to the Russian people why it is stoking a potentially very bloody and costly conflict for Russia, rather than focusing on its own citizens’ health and on Russia’s own significant challenges in building back better."

Department Press Briefing – January 11, 2022 - United States Department of State

I'm sure that convinced Vladdy the evil of his ways. After he finished with his belly laugh he went right to work on it.

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/i...ajVnw&usqp=CAU

What is your solution to the situation?

Quote:

---

What is your solution to the situation?

---

February 1990, U.S. Secretary of State James Baker and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev discussed NATO’s future role in a unified Germany. Baker told Gorbachev that “there would be no extension of NATO’s jurisdiction for forces of NATO one inch to the east” and agreed with Gorbachev’s statement that “Any extension of the zone of NATO is unacceptable.” Although this was not finalized in a formal agreement ,that was the understanding at the end of the Cold War. Bubba got in and knew that Russia was weak and Yeltin a putz . He took advantage of that and the eastern expansion of NATO into the former Soviet Union began.

The question becomes what are we willing to defend ? We know the western Europeans will defend these new NATO nations to the last American standing . It is like pulling teeth to get them to spend the small percent of their GDP that they have agreed to spend on their own defense and NATO.

So I ask you in turn are you willing to defend Ukrainian sovereignty with American blood and treasure ? Will you favor the defense of the Baltic States that have already entered NATO ? Will you agree to have American troops stand like the Spartan 300 to prevent a Russian move through the Suwalki Gap as we once stood on the Fulda Gap in Germany guarding against a Soviet offensive ?

I would make it categorically clear that the US opposes Ukraine entrance into NATO. I would make it clear to Ukraine that if the Russians move on Donbas that they are on their own .It is up to Kiev to make a separate peace with Moscow.
That is the way it is .

Quote:

---

We know the western Europeans will defend these new NATO nations to the last American standing . It is like pulling teeth to get them to spend the small percent of their GDP that they have agreed to spend on their own defense and NATO.

---

Exactly correct. We should have started insisting on a serious effort by our world "allies" years ago. That, or tell them to learn how to speak Russian and Chinese.

Not sure I agree with you about Ukraine. Allow the Russkies to gobble up Ukraine and we could end up facing a more powerful Russia than we have to deal with now. It's a pretty bad time to have a senile person in the White House.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

I would make it categorically clear that the US opposes Ukraine entrance into NATO. I would make it clear to Ukraine that if the Russians move on Donbas that they are on their own .It is up to Kiev to make a separate peace with Moscow. That is the way it is .

---

Your solution is to leave Ukraine in the lurch. No sanctions if Russia invades? Do you acquiesce if Russia invades other countries on its borders? Countries not on its borders?

At least we can be thankful that Trump isn't still president. He'd send weapons to his ally Russia so Putin would let him build Moscow Trump Tower.

Bottom line here is that Putin wants to re-establish the Soviet union, Crimea was a starter, the 'Stans will be next.
He's ex-KGB and just cant let go of such power...

That assumes Russia could beat them at an acceptable cost to them . That means permanently dealing with an insurgency.

I don't like the idea of Russia invading them . I just think our response will be as decisive as it was when Russia decided to protect ethnic Russians in Georgia . In fact Putin's MO has been to do carve outs of territories where ethnic Russians dominate. Where did he get that from ? Maybe the thought entered his mind when NATO helped carve out Kosovo by bombing the cr@p out of Serbia ;a Russian ally .

Unlike the Baltic or the Turkish states ,Ukraine's ties to Russia are deep and historic; much more so than Ukraine's ties to the west. The first Russian state began in Kiev. (Kievan Rus) founded by Rurik long considered the Godfather of Russia .... with the Capitol in Kiev. . And as noted there is a huge ethnic Russian population (more than a third ) .

There is one other geopolitical reason for Russia's interest in Ukraine . Putin says if God had put a mountain range in Ukraine then the plains of eastern Europe would not have been an inviting route of western invasion of Russia. But history doesn't lie. Russia historically was threatened by European invasion with Europe's armies marching through Ukraine's flatlands . A map reader can see why Russia is constantly intervening on it's border lands. The Poles came across the plain in 1605,The Swedes under Charles XII in 1707.The French under Napoleon in 1812 The Germans twice in the 20th century.

During the early days the US was threatened on it's borders and expanded west until it met favorable geography . It would've done the same to the north if we weren't spanked trying . And we fought Mexico and annexed strategic territory for the same reason. It gave us strategic space.
The Russians view Ukraine and Poland the same way.; as strategic space. But now NATO is parked on the Russian border to the north the Baltics and in Poland to the west. NATO weakened a strategic ally in Serbia ; And NATO fought on the Russian border in Afghanistan .

The other strategic factor for Russia has been the lack of warm water port access . The closest they have to that is their Black Sea fleet that is parked historically in Crimea. In Ukraine their concerns and fears intersect.

I don't think Russian control of Ukraine significantly strengthens them at all. But NATO parked in Ukraine threatens them significantly. We almost fought WWIII when Russian military had a nuclear presence in Cuba. To Russia ,Ukraine is Cuba.

Quote:

---

Bottom line here is that Putin wants to re-establish the Soviet union, Crimea was a starter, the 'Stans will be next.
He's ex-KGB and just cant let go of such power..

---

And how many of your countrymen are you willing to sacrifice for Ukraine ? The Stans are willingly going into the Russian orbit after the US left Afghanistan in such a shameful manner .

Quote:

---

Your solution is to leave Ukraine in the lurch.

---

My solution is for Ukraine and Russia to make a separate peace.

Quote:

---

No sanctions if Russia invades?

---

How would that be decisive in any way ? Like the sanctions imposed after Crimea ? Like the sanctions imposed after Russia virtually annexed Abkhazia and South Ossetia in Georgia ?

I mean don't get me wrong ; I like this new found Dem lust to control Russia after the Dem appeasement of the Soviets .

Quote:

---

At least we can be thankful that Trump isn't still president. He'd send weapons to his ally Russia so Putin would let him build Moscow Trump Tower.

---

You have short term memory . It was Trump who sent weapons in defense of both Ukraine and Poland . The Dems best offense appears to be a movable red line .

Quote:

---

My solution is for Ukraine and Russia to make a separate peace.

---

On a level of difficulty scale, I'd give that about a 9.8. It can only happen if the Ukes cave in on virtually everything.

I'm glad I'm not the one having to figure this out. Of all the NATO countries, only the U.S. seems to be adequately committed to defense. The Europeans could be imposing IF they agreed to work together, but I don't expect that to happen. It would be a good idea if they would start actively working to eliminate the need for Russian natural gas.

Quote:

---

It would be a good idea if they would start actively working to eliminate the need for Russian natural gas.

---

Funny you should say that . The one sanction I would've kept was the sanctions on Nord Stream 2

That would be in the US interests because concurrently we could drill baby drill and export LNG to Europe . The same people who want us to "sanction" the cr@p out of Russia in leu of doing anything to actually stop them are the ones that weaken the greatest strategic threat we have against the "gas station with an army "

As for our allies in Europe ; they would be the first ones to look for work arounds against tough sanctions

I would have put allies in quotations marks. It is certainly true that we cannot be the world's policeman. The days of deficit spending must come to screeching, unpleasant halt some day, and then we will be even less capable than we are now. If we could put together a genuine alliance with some teeth, then that might do some good. Until then, and as much as I hate to say it, the Ukes are in serious trouble. Might boil down to how much they value their independence.

They ran that other Vlad stooge out of town but Ukraine is seriously over matched militarily anyway but messing with guys that dig 40's style trenches in frozen ground may not be as easy as one would think.

Wonder what America would be like if not for Lafayette?

Quote:

---

Wonder what America would be like if not for Lafayette?

---

I believe that the revolution and the American experiment was not dependent of one man or the intervention of France no matter how helpful it was to accelerate the final outcome. It was born in the philosophy of the Age of Enlightenment. If I were to give any individual credit it would be John Locke and his influence of the shapers of the revolution and eventually the republic .

A helping hand in a time of need sure didn't hurt keeping that idea alive.

yes indeed and I will always be greatful to the French recognizing that they were in a 100 year war with GB and it was in their interests to support our cause .

But if you want a good comparison to today then all you have to do is think back to the time when the US issued the 'Monroe Doctrine ' knowing there was not a snow ball's chance in hell we could enforce it . But as we got more powerful we did everything we could to drive away European threats from our hemisphere.

Well Russia faces the same thing. It did not have to be that way. We could've done a Marshall Plan and supported the budding democracy in Russia. Instead, as I already detailed; we took the opportunity in Russia's weakness to put US and NATO forces within a couple hundred miles of Moscow.

Even worse ;our posture in the last 30+ years to Russia has forced them into a growing alliance with the one nation we should've been concerned about ....China .

Quote:

---

We could've done a Marshall Plan and supported the budding democracy in Russia. Instead, as I already detailed; we took the opportunity in Russia's weakness to put US and NATO forces within a couple hundred miles of Moscow.

---

Not a bad idea except that we would be in even greater debt now if we had done that. We can't do everything.

It would be no cost because there is PLENTY of foreign aid that is wasted spending . Just a shifting of priorities is /was in order .

Besides part of the rationale for the Marshall plan was to build markets we could exploit and to create reliable trading partners ..and it worked For many years after the war we were the only game in town a lot of American goods went that way.

Quote:

---

It would be no cost because there is PLENTY of foreign aid that is wasted spending . Just a shifting of priorities is /was in order .

---

I think that's a great idea. I also regard the likelihood of it happening to be vanishingly small. Modern pols have figured out that borrowing/printing money is vastly preferred to the business of having to be responsible in making choices that reduce deficits. The easier option is the one that prevails now.

I'm afraid it is too late . The time for this was in the Yeltsin era . I know I have a minority opinion these days since both parties love to demonize Putin and love having that Russian bogyman .

But I take my view on the expansion of NATO post Soviet collapse from the architect of the American policy of Soviet containment and perhaps the foremost expert of Russia in his time ;George Kennan. He called the decision to expand NATO
“the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-Cold War era.”

Opinion | A Fateful Error - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

Such a decision may be expected to inflame the nationalistic, anti-Western and militaristic tendencies in Russian opinion; to have an adverse effect on the development of Russian democracy; to restore the atmosphere of the cold war to East-West relations, and to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking.

It was also a fatal error in that it killed the possibility of transforming Russia from an enemy to a partner .

Common interests ? Let's start with the war against jihadistan. Russia has them on their border . I can't help but think that there would've been a better outcome had Russia not been competing in the ummah for influence.

The problem with your logic Tom is confusing what Vlad wants and what the Russian people want. We really don't know either but we do know Vlad has control of the money and the people and plans to keep it. There is seldom a good option for dealing with his ilk. The Ukraine is worth trillions and of course Vlad wants it back. Obviously the Ukrainians don't want that having sacrificed to be independent. We know that feeling. As we were helped should we not help others achieve the same thing?

How easily to forget where we came from.

Tal this response is for you too ......

Bottom line here is that Putin wants to re-establish the Soviet union, Crimea was a starter, the 'Stans will be next.
He's ex-KGB and just cant let go of such power..


And how many of your countrymen are you willing to sacrifice for Ukraine ?
Question are you familiar with the Azov movement in Ukraine and the influence they have on Ukraine's actions ? I wonder why the western media down plays this ?

I'm doing my homework.

https://geohistory.today/azov-movement-ukraine/

Quote:

---

The problem with your logic Tom is confusing what Vlad wants and what the Russian people want. We really don't know either...

---

If you don't know either one, and you just said you don't, then how did you determine Tom's logic was confusing? Maybe it's your understanding that is lacking???

I enjoy poking Tom for more information. Helps my understanding. He's probably sharpening his stick before he pokes back.

I think I’ll let you two do the poking. Sounds too painful for me!

It is not difficult to determine what either Putin or the Russian people want . Putin is very upfront and the Russian people have culture ,identity ,and a long history that is pretty much unchanged since the dawn of the nation .
The west falsely sees Putin forging a new Russian identity . But in reality ,Russia is the same as it ever was since the beginning when Ivan became Tsar . We believe Nicholas II was the last .But even though the title changed ;Russian rulership did not . All the Communist leaders were tsars and Putin is a tsar.

In essence Putin is a creature of Russia. He doesn't shape Russia .Russia shapes him .

The flow of Russian history is unchanged .They believe in national destiny as much as we do. They believe in Russian exceptionalism as much as we believe in American exceptionalism . When the cold war ended ,instead of an open hand of friendship we humiliated them . One of Putin's chief goals is to restore Russian pride .

I have already mentioned the threat Russia feels from western Europe . They consider themselves the equal of Europe .They tried to create a Russian European identity going back to the days of Peter the Great . Even Putin at one time expressed desired for Russian incorporation into NATO . But he did not think Russia should wait in line .

George Robertson led NATO between 1999 and 2003 He recalls a meeting with Putin when Putin said 'When are you going to invite us to join Nato?’ His reply was ‘Well, we don’t invite people to join Nato, they apply to join Nato.’ Putin responded ‘Well, we’re not standing in line with a lot of countries that don’t matter.’

Russia's Putin wanted to join NATO in early 2000s: Former chief | Daily Sabah

“They wanted to be part of that secure, stable prosperous west that Russia was out of at the time,”

Quote:

---

In another event, Putin told David Frost in a BBC interview that his country may join NATO “if and when Russia’s views are taken into account as those of an equal partner.” Shortly before he was inaugurated for the highest post, the Russian president said that he doesn't see the military alliance as the threat of an archrival.
“Russia is part of the European culture. And I cannot imagine my own country in isolation from Europe and what we often call the civilized world,” Putin said.

---

Russia's desire to join Europe is unchanged since the 17th century . To this day they have been rejected . But just imagine how it would've been different if Russia was allied with us in the fight against jihadistan . Imagine Russian cooperation in our goal of keeping the radicals in Iran from obtaining nukes and their goal of becoming regional hegemons. You think Russia wants a nuclear armed jihadist nation on their border ?

Anyway Russia is also linked to Europe by religion . But even there the views clash. Europe's Christianity is (I'll be kind ) postmodern. The eastern church is more traditional .The Kremlin wants to be seen as a custodian of true Christian values, in opposition to the postmodern liberal interpretations espoused by the countries of the European Union.

In preserving it's sphere of influence that preceded the Soviet Union ,Russia believes it has a claim of geopolitical , cultural ,spiritual ,and civilizational existential interests to defend . I did not mention the Monroe Doctrine lightly .Putin mentions it all the time . The US claims an authority to defend it's interests along it's borders (except apparently it's Mexico soft underbelly .But that is a different discussion) . Russia claims the same authority . NATO expansion is the real issue and threat .

Quote:

---

Wonder what America would be like if not for Lafayette?

---

Samuel Whittemore

One of the first heroes of the war, Samuel Whittemore was also the oldest. An astounding 78 at the start of the Revolutionary War, Whittemore had a long military career before the war broke out. He fought in the French and Indian Wars and helped capture the strategic Fortress of Louisbourg twice over his years of service and though the evidence is scarce, he seems to have retired in his 60’s as a captain of Dragoons.

Immediately after the Battles of Lexington and Concord, the first engagements of the war, the British marched back to Boston, dealing with skirmish Americans all the way. Whittemore was working his fields when he noticed the British marching close to his land. A British relief force had been sent to speed the main force’s retreat and was fast approaching Whittemore’s town.

Not about to stand for any Brits marching through his land, Whittemore loaded his musket and pistols and set up to ambush the Brits. As they came close, he shot and killed one with his rifle and then drew his pistols and killed two more men. Then, at 78 years old, Samuel Whittemore drew his sword and charged the masses of soldiers.

Whittemore didn’t make it far before he was shot in the face and bayonetted 13 times. As the British cleared the area Whittemore’s friends found him in a pool of his own blood, trying to reload his musket. Whittemore was brought to the doctor and pronounced a lost cause. His loved ones waited for Samuel to die, but he just didn’t die.

After a lengthy recovery, Whittemore fully recovered. He had horrible scarring across his face from the gunshot but would otherwise live a normal life for another 20 years. Whitmore would live to see the end of the war, the ratifying of the Constitution and even the beginnings of the quintessential sport of baseball. We know little of Whittemore’s specific military history, but his brave stand at the beginning of the war inspired thousands and certainly qualifies him as a hero of the revolution.

Then we have; Peter Francisco, Benedict Arnold, and many others.
Arnold saved the Revolution...Having been thrown into a stockade by his commanding officer. Breaking out, Rallying the men...the rest is history.

They had something to fight for...being of one body, mind, and spirit. On paper, there is no way, no how the Continental army should have ever Won!

"what does Russia Really want" Eh, Manufacturing, developing new weapons...desiring to show/prove they have the most muscular Armed Forces? If you spend $$$ on a new car you're going to want to use it. If you spend $$$ building up your countries armed forces, your gonna put it to use.

"What does Russia Really want"
Whatcha want, want really, really want want!
I think they just want to have fun (seriously)!!!

There ain't no figuring this one out...carry on.

Thank you ,The Whittemore story was in the recesses of my mind . That was the spirit of the patriot . They endured Valley Forge at a time that 'try men's souls ' (The American Crisis Thomas Paine ) This reinforces the belief that with or without the assistance of the French ,the outcome was inevitable.

UPDATE

Quote:

---

It would be a good idea if they would start actively working to eliminate the need for Russian natural gas.


Funny you should say that . The one sanction I would've kept was the sanctions on Nord Stream 2

That would be in the US interests because concurrently we could drill baby drill and export LNG to Europe . The same people who want us to "sanction" the cr@p out of Russia in leu of doing anything to actually stop them are the ones that weaken the greatest strategic threat we have against the "gas station with an army "

As for our allies in Europe ; they would be the first ones to look for work arounds against tough sanctions

---

There are 55 Senators willing to sanction the Russian company in charge of the Nord Stream II pipeline . Why has it not happened yet ? Because the Dems are blocking it with a filibuster . lol there is a separate irony in them using a filibuster as they also argue for it's elimination .

I'm sure Mr. Biden has thought it through very carefully. [SARC]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

UPDATE



There are 55 Senators willing to sanction the Russian company in charge of the Nord Stream II pipeline . Why has it not happened yet ? Because the Dems are blocking it with a filibuster . lol there is a separate irony in them using a filibuster as they also argue for it's elimination .

---

I wouldn't jump the gun yet, or assume what the Russian people want given Vlad's suppression of his political enemies. Obviously Vlad wants mo' money, mo' power and will crush all who stand in his way.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...line-quicktake

The people of Russia put up with their leaders until they show weakness (see Nicholas II ;Gorby ;Yeltsin ) But ;if what you say is true then why bother caring what the Russian people want ? Do we ask what the people of North Korea want when dealing with lil Kim ?

It is not about money or power . He has that already .It is more about respect and security . His concerns about NATO may be a little over the top because NATO is a bunch of p+ssies who at best can be considered a weak defensive force that relies almost totally on the US for muscle . But historically the threat of Western Europe to the security of Russia is real. 24 million Russians died the last time they miscalculated the threat from the West .

However, Ben is right in that the news from Kazakstan changes the equation . Does Putin want what amounts to insufficient troops to mount an effective offensive ,tied up on the Western frontier when there is a growing threat ;with the shameful retreat of America , threatening Russia's soft underbelly ?

Quote:

---

there is a separate irony in them using a filibuster as they also argue for it's elimination .

---

It's what happens when the quest for power is greater than the respect for character.

how pathetic is NATO ?

Putin must be shaking in his boots about a NATO response to his mobilization on the Ukraine border,

UK delivered anti-tank defensive weapons to Ukraine but had to take a circuitous route when evidently Germany denied them access to fly over German air space. Germany denies it of course ;but there is no other reason why UK planes would need to fly around Germany .
https://i.insider.com/61e6adbf04ce6e...jpeg&auto=webp


btw on the Senate floor they renamed Nord Stream II as the Molotov–Ribbentrop pipeline

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

It is not difficult to determine what either Putin or the Russian people want . Putin is very upfront and the Russian people have culture ,identity ,and a long history that is pretty much unchanged since the dawn of the nation .

The west falsely........................................ etc etc etc ....................... civilizational existential interests to defend . I did not mention the Monroe Doctrine lightly .Putin mentions it all the time . The US claims an authority to defend it's interests along it's borders (except apparently it's Mexico soft underbelly .But that is a different discussion) . Russia claims the same authority . NATO expansion is the real issue and threat .

---

Excellent history lesson. I just got around to reading it thoroughly (after originally only scanning it due to bad NE weather - snow, ice, etc etc). You made several good points. I have always believed that Russia exchanged one stream of Czars for another in 1917. Putin is in that line.

I deleted some of your post to not use up bandwidth for easily found original post above

Thank you .

I asked this question last year in this posting :

Quote:

---

The question becomes what are we willing to defend ? We know the western Europeans will defend these new NATO nations to the last American standing . It is like pulling teeth to get them to spend the small percent of their GDP that they have agreed to spend on their owSo I ask you in turn are you willing to defend Ukrainian sovereignty with American blood and treasure ? Will you favor the defense of the Baltic States that have already entered NATO ? Will you agree to have American troops stand like the Spartan 300 to prevent a Russian move through the Suwalki Gap as we once stood on the Fulda Gap in Germany guarding against a Soviet offensive ?

---

This is in the news today


We have information that more than 100 Wagner mercenaries have advanced towards the Suwalki Gap, not far from Grodno in Belarus,” Morawiecki told a news conference on Saturday.
This makes the situation on the border “even more threatening”, Morawiecki warned during a visit to an arms factory in Gliwice in southern Poland.

Poland raises alarm as Wagner forces move closer to border (msn.com)


The Gap is a narrow strip of NATO land separating Belarus from the Russian controlled Kalingrad It would be a critically strategic strip of land to hold in a conventional war between NATO and Russia.

https://theloop.ecpr.eu/wp-content/u...e-1024x427.jpg

Hard to imagine what a force of only 100 could do.