Posted on 04/29/2022 5:45:05 AM PDT by Kaslin
"Once war is forced upon us, there is no alternative than to apply every available means to bring it to a swift end. War's very object is victory -- not prolonged indecision."
So said Gen. Douglas MacArthur in his April 1951 address to Congress after being fired by President Harry Truman as commander in chief in the Korean War.
And what is now America's goal with our massive infusion into the Ukraine war of new and heavier NATO weapons?
Said Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin on his return from a Sunday meeting in Kyiv with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy:
The United States wants "to see Russia weakened to the point where it can't do things like invade Ukraine."
"Russia," said Austin, has "already lost a lot of military capability and a lot of its troops ... and we want to see them not have the capability to very quickly reproduce that capability."
Thus, the new, or newly revealed, goal of U.S. policy in Ukraine is not just the defeat and retreat of the invading Russian army but the crippling of Russia as a world power.
The sanctions imposed on Russia and the advanced weapons we are shipping into Ukraine are not only to enable the country to preserve its independence and territorial integrity but also to inflict irreversible damage on Mother Russia.
Putin's Russia is not to recover soon or ever from the beating we intend to administer, using Ukrainians to deliver the beating, over an extended period of time.
Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu has seen through to the true objectives of some NATO allies:
"There are countries within NATO that want the Ukraine war to continue. They see the continuation of the war as weakening Russia. They don't care much about the situation in Ukraine."
But to increase steadily and substantially the losses to Russia's economy, as well as its military, the war must go on longer.
And a long war translates into ever-greater losses to the Ukrainians who are alone in paying the price in blood of defeating Russia.
Is Austin committed to fighting this war to the last Ukrainian?
How many dead Russian soldiers -- currently, the estimate of Russian losses is 15,000 of its invasion force -- will it take to satisfy Austin and the Americans?
To achieve, say, a loss of 50,000 dead Russians, how many Ukrainians would have to lose their lives as well? How many Ukrainian cities would have to share the fate of Mariupol?
Clearly, the Joe Biden-Lloyd strategy of indefinitely bleeding Russia contradicts MacArthur's dictum: "War's very object is victory -- not prolonged indecision."
Does a war to bleed the other side to death also contradict the moral conditions for a just war?
Then there are the practical considerations.
When we say we will so weaken Russia that it cannot threaten its neighbors again, we are talking about conventional weapons and power.
Nothing done in Ukraine in this two-month war has diminished the Russian arsenal of 6,000 nuclear weapons, the world's largest stockpile.
And the more we destroy Russian conventional power, the more we force Moscow to fall back onto its ace in the hole -- nuclear weapons.
Asked Tuesday about the risk of a nuclear war emanating from the conflict, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov replied.
"The risks now are considerable. I would not want to elevate those risks artificially. Many would like that. The danger is serious, real. And we must not underestimate it."
Putin put it this way:
"If anyone sets out to intervene in the current events from the outside and creates unacceptable threats for us that are strategic in nature, they should know that our response will be lightning-fast ...
"We have all the tools for this that no one else can boast of having. ... We'll use them if needed. And I want everyone to know that."
Tactical nuclear warheads aboard hypersonic missiles would seem to fit precisely what Putin was describing.
Which raises the question:
Will Putin accept a U.S.-induced permanent reduction in Russia's standing as a great nation? Or would Russia resort to weapons that could avoid that fate and avoid as well the long and debilitating "forever war" some Americans want to impose on his country?
If we are going to bleed Russia into an irreversible strategic decline, is Putin a ruler of the mindset to go quietly into that good night?
Are Putin & Co. bluffing with this implied nuclear threat?
When Georgia invaded South Ossetia in 2008, Putin's Russian army reacted instantly, ran the Georgians out and stormed into Georgia itself.
When the U.S. helped to overthrow the pro-Russian government in Kyiv in 2014, Russia plunged in and took Crimea, the Sevastopol naval base, and Luhansk and Donetsk.
When Ukraine flirted with joining NATO and Biden refused to rule out the possibility, Putin invaded in February.
When he warns of military action, Putin has some credibility.
And in this talk of using tactical atomic weapons to prevent the defeat, humiliation and diminution of Russia itself, is Vladimir Putin bluffing?
Not a chance.
Ukraine is just an excuse to do what they were going to do anyway.
Biden and friends are sitting around rubbing their hands together over the prospect of all those contracts to rebuild Ukraine and how much they can skim off the top for “the big guy”
I see the stupid Biden/NATO leaders pushing Russia into a corner where it will have to decide to surrender or attack while it has the ability to do so.
It is clear that the west wants a hot war with Russia.
I’ve been saying this since day one. Historically, Russia is in a situation that quite often results in a pre emptive attack. There will come a point when Biden, Inc. will be on the verge of accomplishing this stated goal. The Russian response will be a limited nuclear attack (perhaps a limited area EMP) or a move that can only be countered by a nuclear response. Expect any large NATO staging area to be the target, even if in Poland. We are on the top rung of the escalatory ladder.
terrible as it sounds, the US might not be unhappy with a nuclear exchange. this is all in part about domestic politics, and they will be looking for ways to make the midterms not be a problem.
in a modern framework it sound crazy, but cracking history books, it is frighteningly common.
I have said in other posts that I can clearly see a Russia-China-Iran alliance forming that would cripple the west's economies with war on multiple fronts.
Russia attacking the EU with tactical nukes. NATO drawn in.
China attacking Taiwan. Japan and Australia drawn in.
Iran attacking Saudi Arabia and Israel. Israel drawn in.
All this sets the stage perfect for the great reset.
some of the plutocrats pushing for the reset will get something a bit different than they want. hopefully most will be dead if it comes to that, but we are totally screwed.
Ah the clown show of Austin and Milley
“When Georgia invaded South Ossetia ... “
-
How much did Putin pay Pat Buchanan to say this?
From 1922 to 1991, South Ossetia was one of three autonomous oblasts administered as part of Georgia SSR.
These autonomous oblasts, along with autonomous okrugs, are places where certain rights are retained by the ethnic groups associated with those places, but the population isn’t big enough to be a Republic. For example, the language of the ethnic group, along with Russian, is legal in that place.
In addition to Russia and Georgia having such special districts, so do Ukraine (Crimea) and Moldova (Gagauzia and Transnistria) and maybe other former SSRs.
Russia has the following “federal subjects”:
Republic (within Russia today, or previously within Russia SSR) - a state with certain rights retained by the ethnic group associated with that place
Oblast - a state
Krai - a territory
Autonomic Oblast and Autonomic Okrug - small places (think of a county) attached to a larger federal subject for administrative purposes, with certain rights retained by ethnic group associated with that place
According to Putin, Russia is the protector of Russian peoples in the “near republics.” This is the way Hitler thought. Germany was the protector of German people in Austria, Czechoslovakia, the Danzig corridor, and who knows where else. Lots of people, through history, have thought this way. For example, those who believe in Greater Bulgaria. This kind of thinking often leads to war.
I should mention that, under Putin, power has been centralized, shifted from federal subjects to the central government, and Putin has simply ignored when the vote when people in federal subjects reject Russia. Breaking-away is a one-way street that only leads to Moscow.
“Historically, Russia is in a situation that quite often results in a pre emptive attack. “
It smells like the summer of ‘41.
“How much did Putin pay Pat Buchanan to say this?”
Not even stupid and corrupt neocons believe Pat Buchanan is on a Russian payroll.
But they’ll make the accusation anyway.
Pat Buchanan didn’t defend this country when he was military age, avoiding military service, and I can only suppose those who quote him, didn’t either.
Putin is counting on cowards to make his threats of going nuclear piss their pants. And, Putin has a lot of people on his payroll, including internet trolls.
Pat Buchanan has been, among things, an anti-semite, a holocaust denier, and a defender of the lost cause. He has questioned our involvement in World War II, and he has been loving Putin since before Putin sent his assassins into Kiev in 2014. While Buchanan was once provocative and edgy, that is now a long time ago.
Pat Buchanan likens Putin invading Ukraine to our defending the Latin American republics from European invasion under the Monroe Doctrine. He thus does not see the difference between defending yourself and offensive war. Is he really so stupid that he doesn’t see the difference? Or, I will re-ask the question, is he on Putin’s payroll?
It does smell like the summer of ‘41 (when Germany and Russia attacked Poland, the second part of which is denied in Russia).
What are called historical parallels are often wavy lines. There are (or maybe I should say, you can see in them) similarities that suggest parallels, but the future is never certain.
Here is my concern: Russia is a pathetic shell of a country. You can see this in its army. The army is full of drunks and incompetents, and it’s not very big either. Russia doesn’t have the money to maintain a large conventional force and, so, it could not overwhelm Ukraine. BUT, Russia has 6,000 nuclear weapons. These nuclear weapons are all holdovers from the Soviet era. Who knows how many of their missiles will launch properly from their silos? Even if only a fraction do, it will result in enormous losses in the democracies of the world. We will then turn Russia into a sheet of glass.
Russia isn’t led by people who believe in communism and think one day they will “bury you.” Russia is a kleptocracy. Putin and those around him (the ones he hasn’t yet killed or arrested) believe in the almighty ruble. Their greed has now made them willing to commit aggressive war and to commit war crimes such as the execution of civilians. This makes the threat of the use of nuclear weapons a credible.
Putin may overtake Hitler as the most evil man in history.
“This makes the threat of the use of nuclear weapons a credible.”
I expect Russia to light 2-3 small, battlefield nukes in the 25-50ton range to show how seriously they take matters in Ukraine.
“Pat Buchanan didn’t defend this country when he was military age, avoiding military service, and I can only suppose those who quote him, didn’t either.”
I did.
Did you?
Hunter Biden, please pick up the white courtesy phone...
Thank you, Mariner. As one veteran to another, I will watch what I say about you, as long as you return the respect.
Yes, I served, Vietnam era. My son, Iraq/Afghanistan era. My father, Korean era. Three older uncles, first generation Italian-Americans and second-generation German-Americans, WWII, and a great uncle, first-generation German-American, WWI.
I expect Russia to light 2-3 small, battlefield nukes in the 25-50ton range to show how seriously they take matters in Ukraine.
-
I wouldn’t be surprised by anything from Putin. He is totally evil.
We didn’t come to the rescue of Hungary in 1956 or Czechoslovakia in 1968 for fear of WWIII. Things are way different today.
Back then, Russia, then the Soviet Union, was roughly comparable to us in population and GDP, with a much larger conventional military than we had. Plus, it had the countries of eastern Europe as allies. Now, the countries of eastern Europe are part of NATO, the SSRs are split off, with Ukraine and several others also on our side.
The Russian population is shrinking, with a specially big hole in military age men, and they’re getting stupid. Russia’s GDP is 1.5% of NATO GDP. And, in the most recent election of the Duma, center-right and a center-left parties crossed the threshold for representation.
Looking at Putin as a person, the $100+ billion he has is all stolen, as is the wealth of his circle of oligarchs. If he were to retire, or be forced out of office, he’d not only lose that money, he’d go to jail. So, we’re talking about a cornered rat. We have to be prepared for anything.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.