Posted on 02/27/2024 4:07:57 AM PST by hardspunned
Ask Napoleon how that worked out for him.
Once this concludes, Ukraine will resemble 1946 Germany, the Russian section and the western occupation zones. At that point Cold War II will have officially started. The biggest difference will the length of the frontier. It will be eyeball to eyeball “Checkpoint Charlie” confrontation from the Black Sea to the Barents Sea.
You are student of history. Napoleon also tried economic sanctions to bully his adversaries into submission with his Berlin Decree sanctions. That worked out as well as Macron’s involvement in these ridiculous, counterproductive Russian economic sanctions.
Could very well be.
A difference might also be the "post-war" reform. After WWII, the US essentially assisted Europe in rebuilding. (And we paid back some of the massive debt of that time, in the post war period.) With all the nations now in various levels of debt, a question will become "who pays." Or at least, who finances?
Given the current pabulum that trillions must be spent to fight climate change, not to mention coming pandemics and more, the "welfare state" model which we Westerners -- especially the Europeans -- have become accustomed to will have to be jettisoned, in part.
It is an interesting time in which to live.
Tres bien the Frenchies are going to war!
This ought to be good.
More likely they would see to it that Russia loses a couple more AWACs.
Yep, that Ruble is back up to a stunning $0.01087 (as I type this).
the world would be a safer place if Macron and Trudeau weren’t in it...maybe there’s others?
Lol. No. There are probably a few zeepers on here who would gladly sign up to fight for globohomo, but not many.
I went through checkpoint Charlie several times. It gave me a strange feeling, when I read the sign, “you are leaving the American sector.”
Huh? I was talking about the FRENCH. Likely a clandestine op with deniability. Or just supply appropriate weapons & intel.
“ French President Emmanuel Macron said Monday that sending Western troops on the ground in Ukraine is not “ruled out” in the future ”
Neither are sending nuclear missiles to Paris, dumbass.
Now, it IS true that these Western leaders think in a box. For example:
Well before he became Speaker, Mike Johnson was saying he supported aid to Ukraine on two conditions:
Biden must lay out a plan to win. (Ie., NOT some “forever war” with unclear goals.)
Better accounting.
So... IMO the Euro’s should settle on a general plan (there of course has to be SOME flexibility) that does not involve NATO troops in combat in Ukraine. Publicly call on Biden and Johnson to support it or not, negotiate with same if need be. Publicly announce final plan.
Then to start execution of that plan:
No US financial aid to Ukraine - the Euro’s will handle that. It’s far from our biggest contribution anyway.
Send $57 billion in old weapons (at present market value & including transportation cost) to Ukraine. (Pretty safe bet that transportation cost is less than scrapping cost.) All weapons in this package must be at least 7 years old, or already announced (2/1/2024) for scrapping or retirement.
Produce and send $3 billion of new munitions ($1.5 billion in 155 mm shells) to Ukraine in cases where stocks are “low”) (We are not actually “low” on 155 mm shells, but, we are eating into reserves. To be on the cautious side it’d make sense, as a ramp up to 1 million shells a year is underway*, to expand that ramp up further. Devote some production of the newer, high accuracy shells to Ukraine. Also included is authorization of a $50 billion arms sale to Europe.
*Part of the continuing funding of that ramp up is actually in the currently proposed “supplemental” “for Ukraine”.
~$2-$3 billion for training Ukies, setting up F-16 logistics, etc.
$2 billion in humanitarian supplies. Actual physical supplies, not “cash”.
Appropriate $67 billion for new weapons to go into US stocks, focus on cost effectiveness and the latest and emerging threats at least equal to replenishing stocks of old weapons.
Total outlay is $75 billion. $67 billion goes into new / improved / expanded weapons that go into US stocks.
Stand alone bills names:
Humanitarian Aid to Ukraine Bill ($2 Billion),
Weapons Modernization & Old Weapons Disposal Supplemental Bill ($67 Billion), and,
Ukraine New Munitions and Weapons Training Bill ($6 Billion)
Post / propose / briefly explain the plan and bills on all media and social media platforms in writing. Biden theoretically should be able to handle a 5 minute public address on TV, followed by (best?) Olaf Scholz explaining what Germany is doing to get to 2% of GDP for defense spending, and maybe a little graphics presentation showing all the countries aid to Ukraine so far as a % of GDP, per year. (Germany is a slacker on NATO, but by this measure has been more generous than the US with support to Ukraine, by far, even while under greater economic stress.)
These bills would pass easily and those opposing support for Ukraine know it.
This statement by Macron is quite surprising. France has been one of the weakest supporters of weapons aid to Ukraine so far, even though it’s far from Russia, has some good systems, and a half-decent inventory.
That move by Pooty would be suicide and you and he know it.
Pooty COULD do more to threaten France’s uranium supply, though.
The French are lubing up the Reverse gear on their tanks.
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.