Politics And Current Events

[Sam's Drunk Dog]

Maybe we should leave the decision to negotiate up to Ukraine.

[NTP66]

Nah, daddy pissbaby jr already stated that Ukraine should surrender, so here we are.

[Pavel Bure]

I would note that that's much easier to say when it's not your life, or the lives of your friends or family. It's easy to say that Ukraine should fight forever when we aren't the ones doing the fighting, bleeding, and dying.

I am more circumspect as to the question of whether a certain piece of land belongs to Ukraine or to Russia is worth throwing away an entire generation of men from both Russia and Ukraine.

Just to clarify. Are you arguing this point in a vacuum? As in, are you ignoring that Russia has chosen to invade and start wars repeatedly in multiple places? Are you also ignoring that historically fascists don’t stop when appeased?

[Shyster]

Maybe we should leave the decision to negotiate up to Ukraine.

I bet Ukraine would be more willing to negotiate if we cut off the money.

The US has a say in this because we are significantly funding this proxy war.

[shafnutz05]

Shyster, at what point do you justify military action against Russia? Just for shts and giggles

[Shyster]

Just to clarify. Are you arguing this point in a vacuum? As in, are you ignoring that Russia has chosen to invade and start wars repeatedly in multiple places? Are you also ignoring that historically fascists don’t stop when appeased?

Russia is far from blameless in this, but neither is the US and Europe blameless. Russia absolutely deserves blame for starting the war, but it was not without provocation, including the expansion of NATO counties right up to Russia's front door. Putin raged against NATO’s expansion toward Russia’s borders for years, and he clearly decided that the risk of Ukraine joining NATO was the last straw.

[Pavel Bure]

Just to clarify. Are you arguing this point in a vacuum? As in, are you ignoring that Russia has chosen to invade and start wars repeatedly in multiple places? Are you also ignoring that historically fascists don’t stop when appeased?

Russia is far from blameless in this, but neither is the US and Europe blameless. Russia absolutely deserves blame for starting the war, but it was not without provocation, including the expansion of NATO counties right up to Russia's front door. Putin raged against NATO’s expansion toward Russia’s borders for years, and he clearly decided that the risk of Ukraine joining NATO was the last straw.

[faftorial]

:shakeshead:

[faftorial]

So this is all about NATO expansion...

[Shyster]

Shyster, at what point do you justify military action against Russia? Just for shts and giggles

Do you mean direct military action by the United States, as in US soldiers, sailors, aviators, and marines personally fighting? If so, when Russia attacks the United States or is a credible threat to attack the United States.

I've been clear for years that I believe that every overseas US military base should be closed. The US military exists in order to defend US soil, not to have operate military facilities in 85 different countries. I would note—and this might just be a little relevant to Russia's motivations—that now includes such countries as Poland, Romania, Estonia, Turkey, and Bulgaria, not to mention Japan and South Korea.

[Shyster]

I assume that this point no one has an answer as to how you all envision this war ending if not through a negotiated settlement, because no one has said anything other than the war must continue, in perpetuity, until Russia is "breaks" or is otherwise completely defeated and driven from Ukraine, even though no one here can say how that could possibly happen, and the facts of the last year demonstrate that the Ukrainian military does not have the wherewithal to bring that about even with massive aid from the US and Europe.

[Pavel Bure]

I assume that this point no one has an answer as to how you all envision this war ending if not through a negotiated settlement, because no one has said anything other than the war must continue, in perpetuity, until Russia is "breaks" or is otherwise completely defeated and driven from Ukraine, even though no one here can say how that could possibly happen, and the facts of the last year demonstrate that the Ukrainian military does not have the wherewithal to bring that about even with massive aid from the US and Europe.

You just self snitched as a fascist apologist. Hard to give you any answers or converse in good faith.

[mikey]

I'm assuming that when you ask a direct question for a third time, that the name calling will start to rise...

EDIT: God damn, that's perfect haha

[dodint]

[mikey]

I guess my question is...is the thought that Ukraine is going to win...? Is that the expected result here? And to what end do we have to go to help ensure that...?

[Pavel Bure]

I guess my question is...is the thought that Ukraine is going to win...? Is that the expected result here? And to what end do we have to go to help ensure that...?

I don’t know what it would take for Ukraine to outright win. Ukraine winning does seem to be a cause that a lot of the world has vested interest in, or conversely Russia losing is the interest. So it would probably come down to how long does Ukraine have an appetite for fighting because most of the world seems to be willing to support them for as long as it takes.

As for Russia, off the top of my head.

The ruble is nearly worthless now
The fighting is only continuing due to the will of Putin and not of the people
They are suffering heavy casualties

So who knows. Most likely, from my middle aged seat in suburban USA, it takes Putin’s death for Russia to stop.

[mikey]

Yeah, I mean, maybe...I honestly don't even remember that this is going on because it seems to not be moving at all. So, I presume it's like trying to sue a huge corporation as an individual. You might make a bit of noise early on and you hope that it becomes newsworthy or viral or whatever...but ultimately, they're gonna grind you down...only if you have an amazing case are you going to get a settlement offer. That's what this feels like from my not quite middle aged standing desk in Big City, USA.

So, how serious are we about this and if we get serious enough to push things in Ukraine's favor is it worth the risk of an actually serious international incident.

For all of the whack ass nonsense in this thread over the years, I had the impression that the undercurrent was "USA, don't police the world anymore" - which lasted right up until ****** pointless non-strategic nation lost two dozen corn fields to former rival...

Plus, if we're going to have to go to war with an actual ally soon, I'd prefer we focus on that soon-to-be endless expenditure...

[Pavel Bure]

Not sure what would cause an international incident short of actual US Troops/Military joining the fray. We’ve already given them money, equipment, and intel. So I don’t think an escalating incident happens. I guess Putin could go off the deep end and use a nuke. Although, if a place like India/Pakistan didn’t use them over Kashmir (a historical situation that imo is somehow more volatile than what we’re seeing currently) I don’t see Putin doing that.

As far as the policing the world thing. From memory it seems to go back to things that were put in place after WW2 because keeping our noses out of it got us Pearl Harbor and got the world a dictator that wanted to eradicate a race of people. Now, in present day, it directly affects us with Israel.

I suppose with Ukraine there’s a vested interest in showing a power hungry dictator in Russia (and anywhere else that might want to get froggy) that undue aggression won’t be tolerated. Especially so when proximity to NATO countries is concerned.

I don’t see the US ever standing by and allowing a leader like Putin do whatever they want. But what do I know.

[Shyster]

You just self snitched as a fascist apologist. Hard to give you any answers or converse in good faith.

Russia is a giant piece of crap, and Russia deserves tons of blame for both starting the war, continuing the war, and committing atrocities during the war. The question is whether continuing to fight Russia in perpetuity is worth the dear cost in lives and treasure, especially when the last year strongly indicates that a Russian defeat on the battlefield is not a reasonably achievable outcome. Giving Russia even more of Ukraine would be a bitter pill, but so would be tens of thousands of additional casualties, especially when there are no indications that those additional casualties would actually produce a victory.

I do not view "perpetual meat grinder" as a viable long-term solution for Ukraine. Human life is too precious to thrown away, and the cost is not sustainable, either for Ukraine or for the US.

[Lelldorin]

Analphabets without skills, that will cost the taxpayers much more money than they put into the system, not so much.

It depends on how you want to categorize this. I am not very familiar with the immigration situation in Sweden, but in the U.S. those type of immigrants disproportionately go into workforce segments like agriculture and housing (and to a lesser extent hospitality). Low skill, manual labor jobs that actually do produce things.

There are a number of factors that tend to be overlooked in calculating economic impact (both good and bad) of immigration. Things like the immigrant workforce has, almost by definition, greater portability in this country and can more readily respond to regional shortages if/when they occur. (This is a known seasonal shift; following changing harvest seasons in agriculture, moving to hit the fair weather building season, etc) The net effect, generally, is that they contribute more to the economy as a whole than they take out.

Yes, illiterates can work in elder care for example, But Sweden has very few physical jobs and most of them are in healtcare where the patients need to understand the personell...
The two main issues in Sweden are:
-Many people are living on money from the state while applying for 6 jobs a month even though they know that they will nog get the jobs.
-"Simple jobs" have low salaries which means that the people that try to contribute actually pay in less money to the system than they receive since we have free healthcare etc...

[Lelldorin]

I admit that I have drunk Ukrainian cool-aid, but I think that they are currently winning. Their goal has not been to recapture territory but to destroy the Russian military.
It seems like Russia is low on active manpower, ammunition and armored vehicles. They will have to draft much more citizens to replenish their current divisions and there are a lot of trucks going to and from North Korea.

Ukraine has driven away the Russian Black Sea fleet to the eastern part of the Black Sea, even though they have almost no navy.

The minefields have been slowing down the Ukrainian attack and they lack the aircraft necessary for air superiority. Admit Sweden into NATO so Sweden can give away our JAS Gripen to Ukraine

Regardless of whether Ukraine gets more equipment/weapons or not, I think that they will have reached the Black Sea east of Crimea before Christmas.

I would not encurage giving a fascist country some reward for losing an angression war, so they can take five years to recover and then attack again.

[Gaucho]

yup

[count2infinity]

Probably the simplest path toward the removal of Russian troops from Ukraine is waiting for Putin to die. If Russia isn’t careful and plan for that inevitable event, there may not even be a Russia in the next few years. There will be enough internal conflict and division that Ukraine isn’t even a consideration anymore.

[Gaucho]

I don't know who Putin's successor will be, but I have a feeling removing troops from Ukraine won't be high on his agenda.

[count2infinity]

It will be if they can’t agree on a successor and the country is breaking up. Who gives a f*ck about expanding when you have 3 or 4 regions of your own country trying to take over?