'Deadly cluster weapons banned in 108 countries' to be sent to Ukraine troops by US

The whole handling of the war by the retards in our administration has been idiotic since the beginning.

First, the war started precisely because Putin knew the same cowards of Syrian "red line" fame were back in charge. He knew that from the Afghanistan withdrawal debacle if nothing else, further signaled by Biden's mealy mouthed comments about maybe just taking a chunk of Ukraine before the war.

Support for Kiev has been half-hearted at best despite the rhetoric. Our regime expected Kiev to fall within a few days, which is why they offered Zelensky a ride out. This implies the judgment of our our defense and intelligence assets about Russia's & Ukraine's military capabilities were as "accurate" as that received by Putin. We have morons flying the national airplane with the windows painted black.

They have followed the traditional American elite policy of maximum support in terms of rhetoric and cowardly gradual escalation in terms of action. The result is a semi-stalemate a la Korea without conditions for a lasting peace being laid. If the arms now delivered to Kiev had been provided last summer, Kiev could have probably pushed the Russians back to their Feb 2022 starting lines in autumn and then serious negotiations could have taken place exchanging formal recognition of Russia's 2014 annexations with meaningful security guarantees for Kiev.

Meanwhile, facing the possibility of a Trump return, China is preparing an attack on Taiwan that may very well come before the 2024 election here. They have spent thirty years preparing, copying and stealing our and Russia's best tech and building a huge navy. They will be opposed by our collection of poorly manned, poorly trained and woefully maintained and equipped rust buckets and the smallest Marine Corps since before WWII. My prediction is we'll lose several ships and thousands of American lives and when our economy begins to collapse from unavailable Chinese imports our regime will cave.

--- "They will be opposed by our collection of poorly manned, poorly trained and woefully maintained and equipped rust buckets and the smallest Marine Corps since before WWII. My prediction is we'll lose several ships and thousands of American lives and when our economy begins to collapse from unavailable Chinese imports our regime will cave."

Given that a land war involving US troops in Ukraine would require massive logistics problems and a sea war involving US maritime and air power thousands of miles forward of any supply lines suggests that what Gingrich and Pelosi once termed the "world's policeman" was and remains a naive concept.

Given DC to Kiev is about 4K miles, and LA to Taiwan is almost 7K miles, while Kiev to Moscow is about 500 miles, and the distance from mainland China to Taiwan is about 400 miles, simple calculations of logistics and supply suggest that the "world's policeman" is at a distinct disadvantage in what might otherwise be considered "regional disputes."

When we as conservatives speak about the 2nd amendment, we observe that, when a criminal attacks and seconds count, the police are "only minutes away." This applies to the larger world.

A world of trading partners is a better option than a world of littered battlefields. Seems a little like something President Trump has observed a number of times. Best wishes.

“Ukraine needs these to clear entrenched Russian troops.” There are no civilians there and these areas are already heavily mined.

Most of what we have been told about this conflict has not been totally true. But the real question is, can Zelenskyy and/or his army of many untrained and unreliable people be trusted to handle this level of mass destruction intelligently? The guy’s got no experience as a military leader and has done no more than the entertainment industry since he graduated from Kyiv National Economic University in 2000. He’s a stand up comedian and glory hound that plays war by throwing money at it. US hack liberals do the same thing.

https://www.president.gov.ua/en/president/biografiya#:~:text=President%20of%20Ukraine,-Volodymyr%20Zelenskyy%20was&text=President%20Zelenskyy%20is%20a%20prize,film%20festivals%20and%20media%20forums.

Can he be trusted to act responsibly when he now can toss the deaths of hundreds of people at a time to include civilians during and post the aftermath of using this type of weapon?

The Biden administration announced Friday that a new weapons package for Ukraine will include cluster bombs — a controversial type of weapon the U.S. has not provided to the country before. Specifically, the package will include 155mm DPICMs, which stands for dual-purpose improved conventional munitions.

You’ll notice they are not saying what the different types of cluster bombs they are sending. Just that one munition. The air-to-surface variety of this kind of munition is also known as a cluster bomb. They are banned by more than 100 countries under the Convention on Cluster Munitions.

Cluster bombs can be dropped from the air or shot from the ground or sea, and the dozens or hundreds of bomblets they release can disperse over a large area. They were first used in World War II for the purpose of destroying multiple dispersed military targets or combatants. Beyond that, many of the bomblets fail to explode immediately, meaning they can injure or kill people years later. According to the International Committee of the Red Cross, the submunition failure rate — referred to as the “dud rate” — has varied from 10% to 40% in recent conflicts.

And when you look at the U.S. government’s actual figures, the Government Accountability Office, for example, it has a 23 percent dud rate. If we look at a standard volley from rocket artillery, which would be six rockets fired from HIMARS, you’re looking at over 3,800 cluster munitions. At 23%, that’s 874 hot duds on the ground after a single attack. And as for air release, they have already been using them with drones on a smaller scale. Can Zelenskyy be trusted? Who’s the fool? The fool or the fool who follows?

wy69

I'm more worried about Taiwan than Kiev: if adequately armed, the Ukrainians have shown they can defend themselves. I don't see any need for US ground troops.

The distances involved work in different ways: bad for us in the short term, better for us in the long term, assuming we have maintained the capacity to build our forces. Neither Russia nor China maintain any significant conventional assets anywhere near the US, while the reverse is true for the US, with major bases in both Europe and the Far East. We get to fight on someone else's territory, they have to fight on their own. Our geostrategic position is the best of any major power: very difficult to attack because of distance, but having enough of our own resources (plus Canada's) at our disposal we can operate autonomously if necessary. China, by contrast, is extremely vulnerable for energy, raw material, and food imports. China has to hope for a short war. If we adequately prepared (which I doubt at the moment), we can pick and choose where and for how long we want to fight.

Your statement, "A world of trading partners is a better option than a world of littered battlefields." is a nice sentiment but hardly one that withstands any historical scrutiny. The world was almost as interconnected before WWI as now. That didn't prevent WWI. Countries fight for different reasons that make no sense from a libertarian perspective. That's simply human nature. A world of "trading partners" that act responsibly and equitably has to be fought for: it doesn't exist by itself. Believing we can have it if we refrain from foreign intervention is just paleocon virtue signaling: foreign countries controlled by local despots following their own political imperatives will not follow our lead. I guess that's our biggest difference in perspective.

--- "Believing we can have it if we refrain from foreign intervention is just paleocon virtue signaling: foreign countries controlled by local despots following their own political imperatives will not follow our lead. I guess that's our biggest difference in perspective."

Thanks for a cogent reply. I confess, I had to look up the term "paleocon." In doing a search for it, I came across an article on the often unpleasant Vox, titled "Paleoconservatism, the movement that explains Donald Trump, explained," from 2016.

Source: https://www.vox.com/2016/5/6/11592604/donald-trump-paleoconservative-buchanan

The first paragraph of your reply details your view, apparently. I place it in a frame which begins with a national debt of about $5 trillion in 2000, rising precipitously to $32 trillion today, in only 22 years. So, I have to push back on your assertion that "If we adequately prepared (which I doubt at the moment), we can pick and choose where and for how long we want to fight." After all, and as you say, you "doubt" that. The enormous debt being modified now by movement in the BRICS+ group to trade in other than a dollar denomination suggests your doubt is apt and valid.

How does a nation war against China, of which you write, when so many precursor chemicals, raw materials and finished goods are supplied by the target of our "war?" Adn were we to war with China in Taiwan, what would be left of Taiwan upon which to build?

I would take the cultural wars we are engaged in these last months as examples of how to wage and perhaps win wars. Disney and Anheuser-Busch are examples in which mere little people like us managed to shake to foundations of large multi-national companies. So I think, if the Vox assignment of "paleocon" to Trump is adequate to this small discussion, I accept the term. But I think it is not empty virtue signaling when such things as last market share and stock values can be so affected. Those are "signals" which are not empty.

Much of this is amusing, as Anheuser-Busch presents itself as an "American brewing company with HQ in St. Louis, while it is owned by the Belgian company whose stock has been so hit by recent events. In the same way, perhaps it is time to recognize how many "American" companies have sold out to China and other nations, such that a next campaign in a longer war is not to threaten China with a naval fleet, but with enforced repatriation of companies and assets to the US? I suspect such a war could be won. It is the take I have of President Trump's position as well, even if a paleocon.

One thing is certain. The current resident of the White is no true friend to the United States. But he and his are neocons and neolibs feeding the swamp, while feeding off of the same swamp.

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.