In other words,. the West doesn't have any really good options here. Sanctions are likely to be ineffective, and there is no military option that ends well. At the same time, take away constant infusions of IMF cash and pipeline revenues, and Ukraine would be in even worse shape than it already is.
In other words,. the West doesn't have any really good options here. Sanctions are likely to be ineffective, and there is no military option that ends well. At the same time, take away constant infusions of IMF cash and pipeline revenues, and Ukraine would be in even worse shape than it already is.
At the same time, Biden cannot be seen to back down. In part, this is because the United States is an empire in decline, and any overt weakness might cause vassals to start getting ideas.
But the real reason Biden is out of options here is because of the fundamentally third world nature of contemporary USA politics. Without unduly belaboring the point, if you have ever spent more than a few hours living in a Third World country and you were sort of paying attention during this time, you will note that politics in such a country is a zero-sum game. Anything that helps your opponents hurts you, and anything that helps you hurts your opponents. So even a policy that benefits the country as a whole must be bitterly opposed, if your opponents are for it or it also benefits them. (War and the military seem to be the exception in the United States. Wars that in no way benefit the country enjoy unswerving bipartisan support, rising even to the status of sacred cows that can never be questioned. This is also not an uncommon feature in the third world.)
This means that if Biden calls for anything less than Total Victory, his opponents on Team R will pounce, calling for the fainting couch and rending their garments most piteously while wailing something about "appeasement" and insisting that Trump (or whatever other "leader" Team R tries to foist on us) is the reincarnation of Winston Churchill who would have pushed The Button sooner and better. It doesn't help that Team D was doing the same thing to Trump a year or so ago, pushing wackadoodle conspiracy theories that were contradicted by all available facts and by just about everything that the Trump maladministration did, to boot.
So for Team R, the opportunity to call the other guy an appeaser and weakling acting on behalf of foreign powers is especially sweet.
"if you have ever spent more than a few hours living in a Third World country and you were sort of paying attention during this time, you will note that politics in such a country is a zero-sum game." What you describe sounds more like North American politics, with 2 main parties disagreeing on everything to the detriment of the country. I wonder what third world countries you're referring to? I spent many years in Indonesia, both before and after the downfall of Soeharto. The unfortunate truth is that democracy tends to create this constant 'combative' atmosphere between parties. 'Benevolent dictators', like Soeharto, can do wonders for a country if they genuinely care about the people. Putin similarly turned things around in Russia. Lee Kuan Yew is widely recognized for the successes of Singapore and it certainly wasn't democratic. The switch to democracy in Indonesia was remarkable but the lack of clear leadership and policy since then shows the inherent weakness of democracy.
I also spent a lot of time in Ukraine and was there during the Maidan Revolution in 2014. Democracy was doing well till then and they could have voted out the elected leader a year from them, but they chose violence instead. The country is still paying the consequences of that decision, which was made by a small, nationalist minority with Western support. The best solution now is pretty much the same as it was then: fix your internal problems and quit looking to the West or Russia for help, and don't allow yourself to be a pawn in their chess match. Unfortunately, it's difficult to fix the problems without a strong leader that can make hard decisions and take decisive action. Pre-Maidan, it was often suggested that a Swiss style of government would have been effective in Ukraine. I suspect that is still true but with nationalists in control, that isn't likely to happen.
NATO membership is the key issue and the west (and Ukraine) should not be insistent on this. After the breakup of the USSR, the West promised not to move an inch closer with NATO. It's time the West quit provoking the Russian bear and gave them a measure of respect.
This is old, and a lot has changed, but I couldn't help but respond to this disingenuous post.
" 'Benevolent dictators', like Soeharto," ... "Putin similarly turned things around in Russia" .... In 2020 GDP per capita in Russia was level with 2007 - 13 years later, no lasting growth. Between 2010 and 2020 median income fell 35%. He's alienated most of the developed world. You're right - he's been great.
As for Ukraine's thriving democracy before 2014. What a funny point you chose to pick. The Maidan was the SECOND time the people of Ukraine had to rise up to overthrow the SAME Kremlin backed president. Literally, this guy had already been tossed in a revolution once before. And got back in power. So yeah, all was roses before Maidan you're right. What exactly was wrong with Zelenskyys election? Please, elaborate on how much worse it was than when they elected a guy they had to revolt to throw off a few years before.
Any conversation of democracy in Ukraine or anywhere in the ex-Soviet republics is scarred by the manner in which Russia continues to treat them as satellite states. As long as Russia feels it is their right to determine who is president of other sovereign nations, and uses their military to do so, you will not have true democracy.
The roots of Ukraine's political crises are not domestic. Never have been. The Russian language stuff is nonsense - they LITERALLY HAVE A RUSSIAN SPEAKING PRESIDENT (Zelensky). The genocide claims have never once been backed with any public presentation of evidence - just "Trust me bro" from people who break their word constantly.
When were you in Ukraine? I first went in 2003, then spent a lot of time there from 2009-14. What was most surprising to me was that they didn't 'feel' like a country with a clear border and identity, yet they all got along with each other extremely well (ethnic Russians and Ukrainians). In Canada, we had a clear identity of Ukraine and its borders, which perhaps didn't encompass the large 'Russian' population. After 2014, it was tragic seeing families break apart as everybody had to 'chose a side'.
As for 'empires', the UK has largely put that ambition and heritage to rest and it's time the US did the same.
Hmm, I think for the West (read USA), it is necessary to accept the current situation and who has the most influence. The end of the Cold War was squandered with Russia feeling humiliated (deja vu Versailles ?). I think, reading all the blogs on this subject, Putin (and Russian people) wish to be respected and taken seriously. Empathy is to put yourself in someone else's shoes. Let us remember how the US viewed Cuban military expansion in the 1960s. Some degree of brinkmanship is required in these negotiations, both parties, US and Russia will put in high early bids that they know are unrealistic but a settlement is possible, though unlikely to be popular with Ukraine.
No. As Central European, strongly supporting Ukraine since February, West needs to wake up. We don't care about feeling of Putin or any other russian. We don't want Russia to be appeased, we want it to be defeated, destroyed economically and politically, Putin in Hague, and Russian federation dismantled to pieces, so no other oligarch can try to commit genocide on its neighbors.
, American corporations, with the support of the US government, invested heavily in Russia after the cold war, in hopes of improving life among Russians and developing a better relationship. THAT IS A FACT. And with the hopes that Russia could become more democratic and trustworthy. Instead, the thieving Russian mobster Putin stole as much as he could and rewarded only his cronies in crime against the Russian people. Now this monster has betrayed everyone, the West and all the young people of Russia , who he sends to die, with a vicious war no one else wanted. Don't lecture to us in America about things gone badly, it is totally the work of your dictator.
The military gets 15% of the US budget every penny discretionary (fought over).
Social security and medicare are automatic and non discretionary.
So the so called MIC is very weak and Ike’s speech was actually obsolete by mid 1960s.
Butter is and Debt service 2/3 of the budget.
But the real truth that most don’t realize is the military is NOT the Empire, that is the State Department. Its not the budget its THE POWER. The War Mongers are at Foggy Bottom, not the hapless Pentagon. The Pentagon is really and truly just the worlds largest parts store, it exists to have presence in DC that is seemingly imposing and may impress new Congress creatures. The Pentagon is like Amazon’s largest warehouse and service center- but not Amazon HQ never mind Bezos palace or yacht. The Pentagon exists so we hopefully never run out of everything like we did in WW2 at start , or Korea. The Pentagon fails at this task frequently of course (soldiers are servants with guns in the American pecking order) as it has now.
This is from West Point, Dr.Anthony Kharber is telling the Cadets of 2018 how F they are against Russia.
In other words,. the West doesn't have any really good options here. Sanctions are likely to be ineffective, and there is no military option that ends well. At the same time, take away constant infusions of IMF cash and pipeline revenues, and Ukraine would be in even worse shape than it already is.
At the same time, Biden cannot be seen to back down. In part, this is because the United States is an empire in decline, and any overt weakness might cause vassals to start getting ideas.
But the real reason Biden is out of options here is because of the fundamentally third world nature of contemporary USA politics. Without unduly belaboring the point, if you have ever spent more than a few hours living in a Third World country and you were sort of paying attention during this time, you will note that politics in such a country is a zero-sum game. Anything that helps your opponents hurts you, and anything that helps you hurts your opponents. So even a policy that benefits the country as a whole must be bitterly opposed, if your opponents are for it or it also benefits them. (War and the military seem to be the exception in the United States. Wars that in no way benefit the country enjoy unswerving bipartisan support, rising even to the status of sacred cows that can never be questioned. This is also not an uncommon feature in the third world.)
This means that if Biden calls for anything less than Total Victory, his opponents on Team R will pounce, calling for the fainting couch and rending their garments most piteously while wailing something about "appeasement" and insisting that Trump (or whatever other "leader" Team R tries to foist on us) is the reincarnation of Winston Churchill who would have pushed The Button sooner and better. It doesn't help that Team D was doing the same thing to Trump a year or so ago, pushing wackadoodle conspiracy theories that were contradicted by all available facts and by just about everything that the Trump maladministration did, to boot.
So for Team R, the opportunity to call the other guy an appeaser and weakling acting on behalf of foreign powers is especially sweet.
"if you have ever spent more than a few hours living in a Third World country and you were sort of paying attention during this time, you will note that politics in such a country is a zero-sum game." What you describe sounds more like North American politics, with 2 main parties disagreeing on everything to the detriment of the country. I wonder what third world countries you're referring to? I spent many years in Indonesia, both before and after the downfall of Soeharto. The unfortunate truth is that democracy tends to create this constant 'combative' atmosphere between parties. 'Benevolent dictators', like Soeharto, can do wonders for a country if they genuinely care about the people. Putin similarly turned things around in Russia. Lee Kuan Yew is widely recognized for the successes of Singapore and it certainly wasn't democratic. The switch to democracy in Indonesia was remarkable but the lack of clear leadership and policy since then shows the inherent weakness of democracy.
I also spent a lot of time in Ukraine and was there during the Maidan Revolution in 2014. Democracy was doing well till then and they could have voted out the elected leader a year from them, but they chose violence instead. The country is still paying the consequences of that decision, which was made by a small, nationalist minority with Western support. The best solution now is pretty much the same as it was then: fix your internal problems and quit looking to the West or Russia for help, and don't allow yourself to be a pawn in their chess match. Unfortunately, it's difficult to fix the problems without a strong leader that can make hard decisions and take decisive action. Pre-Maidan, it was often suggested that a Swiss style of government would have been effective in Ukraine. I suspect that is still true but with nationalists in control, that isn't likely to happen.
NATO membership is the key issue and the west (and Ukraine) should not be insistent on this. After the breakup of the USSR, the West promised not to move an inch closer with NATO. It's time the West quit provoking the Russian bear and gave them a measure of respect.
This is old, and a lot has changed, but I couldn't help but respond to this disingenuous post.
" 'Benevolent dictators', like Soeharto," ... "Putin similarly turned things around in Russia" .... In 2020 GDP per capita in Russia was level with 2007 - 13 years later, no lasting growth. Between 2010 and 2020 median income fell 35%. He's alienated most of the developed world. You're right - he's been great.
As for Ukraine's thriving democracy before 2014. What a funny point you chose to pick. The Maidan was the SECOND time the people of Ukraine had to rise up to overthrow the SAME Kremlin backed president. Literally, this guy had already been tossed in a revolution once before. And got back in power. So yeah, all was roses before Maidan you're right. What exactly was wrong with Zelenskyys election? Please, elaborate on how much worse it was than when they elected a guy they had to revolt to throw off a few years before.
Any conversation of democracy in Ukraine or anywhere in the ex-Soviet republics is scarred by the manner in which Russia continues to treat them as satellite states. As long as Russia feels it is their right to determine who is president of other sovereign nations, and uses their military to do so, you will not have true democracy.
The roots of Ukraine's political crises are not domestic. Never have been. The Russian language stuff is nonsense - they LITERALLY HAVE A RUSSIAN SPEAKING PRESIDENT (Zelensky). The genocide claims have never once been backed with any public presentation of evidence - just "Trust me bro" from people who break their word constantly.
You have to identify the problem to solve it.
I also spent many years in Ukraine, among other places.
When were you in Ukraine? I first went in 2003, then spent a lot of time there from 2009-14. What was most surprising to me was that they didn't 'feel' like a country with a clear border and identity, yet they all got along with each other extremely well (ethnic Russians and Ukrainians). In Canada, we had a clear identity of Ukraine and its borders, which perhaps didn't encompass the large 'Russian' population. After 2014, it was tragic seeing families break apart as everybody had to 'chose a side'.
As for 'empires', the UK has largely put that ambition and heritage to rest and it's time the US did the same.
Hmm, I think for the West (read USA), it is necessary to accept the current situation and who has the most influence. The end of the Cold War was squandered with Russia feeling humiliated (deja vu Versailles ?). I think, reading all the blogs on this subject, Putin (and Russian people) wish to be respected and taken seriously. Empathy is to put yourself in someone else's shoes. Let us remember how the US viewed Cuban military expansion in the 1960s. Some degree of brinkmanship is required in these negotiations, both parties, US and Russia will put in high early bids that they know are unrealistic but a settlement is possible, though unlikely to be popular with Ukraine.
No. As Central European, strongly supporting Ukraine since February, West needs to wake up. We don't care about feeling of Putin or any other russian. We don't want Russia to be appeased, we want it to be defeated, destroyed economically and politically, Putin in Hague, and Russian federation dismantled to pieces, so no other oligarch can try to commit genocide on its neighbors.
, American corporations, with the support of the US government, invested heavily in Russia after the cold war, in hopes of improving life among Russians and developing a better relationship. THAT IS A FACT. And with the hopes that Russia could become more democratic and trustworthy. Instead, the thieving Russian mobster Putin stole as much as he could and rewarded only his cronies in crime against the Russian people. Now this monster has betrayed everyone, the West and all the young people of Russia , who he sends to die, with a vicious war no one else wanted. Don't lecture to us in America about things gone badly, it is totally the work of your dictator.
The military gets 15% of the US budget every penny discretionary (fought over).
Social security and medicare are automatic and non discretionary.
So the so called MIC is very weak and Ike’s speech was actually obsolete by mid 1960s.
Butter is and Debt service 2/3 of the budget.
But the real truth that most don’t realize is the military is NOT the Empire, that is the State Department. Its not the budget its THE POWER. The War Mongers are at Foggy Bottom, not the hapless Pentagon. The Pentagon is really and truly just the worlds largest parts store, it exists to have presence in DC that is seemingly imposing and may impress new Congress creatures. The Pentagon is like Amazon’s largest warehouse and service center- but not Amazon HQ never mind Bezos palace or yacht. The Pentagon exists so we hopefully never run out of everything like we did in WW2 at start , or Korea. The Pentagon fails at this task frequently of course (soldiers are servants with guns in the American pecking order) as it has now.
This is from West Point, Dr.Anthony Kharber is telling the Cadets of 2018 how F they are against Russia.
No mines (Princess Di)
No EW (Electronic Warfare)
No Air Supremacy
Far less artillery
https://youtu.be/_CMby_WPjk4