"bad options for Ukraine" Topic

written as advice for Republican pols but generally applicable

link

"No one wants to hear about Ukraine again, but we need to talk about Ukraine again. The Republican debate the other week highlighted the problem. And the problem is simple. There are no good answers, but all the candidates are going to have to pick one anyway."

"We have to adopt a strategy, and none of the options are good. Let me give you a course of action briefing as we would do for our general in the Army as part of our military decision-making process. There are four, and they all suck, but some are more sucky than others."

Course of Action One is do whatever it takes to get the Ukrainians to win the war outright, by which I mean driving the Russians out of the Ukrainian territory that they occupy.

Course of Action Two is the opposite – basically, just walk away. Wash our hands of the whole mess.

Course of Action Three is to force a negotiation to resolve the dispute, since neither belligerent seems willing to compromise.

The Fourth and final course of action is the least advantageous to us, and, therefore, naturally, the one our politicians have embraced so far – the meat grinder option. This is the course of action where we give the Ukrainians just enough ammunition and training to keep the killing going on indefinitely.

I don't expect bold actions by our politicians. But I favor a modified COA 3. Tell Russia if they don't sit down to negotiate in 30 days, then we will impose drastic economic and diplomatic sanctions and will provide whatever it takes to Ukraine. We make it clear we have no designs on Russian territory aside from restoring Ukraine to its post-USSR state.

Yes, politicians don't do bold. They go directly from timid to over-confident.

Next few weeks should show us what Ukraine can do now that they have penetrated the Russian defense line.

Unfortunately, they've only penetrated Russia's first defense line. There are two more, although they won't be as strong as the first.

Is Biden an incompetent half-wit, as he says at the start? How should I take this? Constructive criticism? Well-researched conclusion? I don't want his politics in my face like this no matter what I think, and I am not a Biden supporter. He is only addressing the Republican Party here. Yikes….

Civil discourse this is not, IMO. I might even agree with some of his points. But we have covered all of this here already with a lot less…I guess I don't know what to call his tone.

The fourth option is the one we seem to do the most since the end of WWII.

Mike Bunkermeister Creek

"The Fourth and final course of action is the least advantageous to us, and, therefore, naturally, the one our politicians have embraced so far – the meat grinder option. This is the course of action where we give the Ukrainians just enough ammunition and training to keep the killing going on indefinitely."

And to be cynical about the politicians, it allows them to grift and graft longer, and to proclaim during their re-elections, "See? I did [something]!". Without doing anything at all…

Tort, we SAID he is a Republican addressing Republicans. What's the problem? Based on history, there is a 50% chance the Republican nominee is the next Commander in Chief. And in any case, do you see other options besides the four he presents?

Does politics really end at the waters edge? That was not even really true during the CW when there was a consensus on deterrence. Or, if there is really no difference between Ds and Rs on such a giant issue, then we do have a uniparty as the populists charge. In any case, why be shocked at a partisan being partisan? His analysis is, or is not, valid regardless.

raylev3, none of the lines of defense is inferior to the other. They are all identical. In addition, if the breakthrough does not occur quickly enough, work to expand and strengthen subsequent lines is carried out at the time of the assault on the first line to prevent the threat of a breakthrough.

link

From the very beginning of the war, the Russians stormed similar Ukrainian fortifications, which were built around the territories of the LPR and DPR for eight years. And in most areas they were successfully overcome.

link

Well, we promised to protect and respect their borders, along with the Russians, way back when Ukraine gave up all of their nukes. Pretty cut and dried for me, option number one. Better to spend some money than expend the lives of our troops. We learned what appeasement does a long time ago.

Doc you missed part of my point. It is the incivility, I want to escape this kind of name calling. If the target was Trump…imagined the reaction here. This is TMP and partisan belongs on the Blue Fez, IMO. I once got hammered by Bill for an NYT link, although no dawghouse. Maybe this is similar. I don't always get these distinctions.

A number of people believe that the chaos, instability, and weakness the US presented to the world during the worst transition of power in our history after the last election had everything to do with Putin's timing, not Afghanistan, where he had seen his own country defeated.

There is no sign that Biden is giving up on Ukraine, but here he is attacked as if he had chosen this option. "American would be seen as feckless, which it is." I am tired of these comments about America.

Ukraine is "not skilled enough to use combined arms?" Care to support this claim? Anyone? It might make a good discussion.

Are any of us thinking Americas military is not the most powerful, our economy not the largest? NATO has not had a resurgence? How about some facts about Europe's contributions?

And the fifth option? Trump can end the war in 24 hours, he says.

Bottom line IMO if the US & NATO stop supporting the Ukraine. And Russia is allowed to hold the terrain they have in the Ukraine. E.g. the Donbas, land bridge to Crimea and Crimea. This will give the war criminal Putin and his complicit associates a "win". This will embolden Xi. As the US debacle in A'stan embolden Putin to invade the Ukraine.

Predators can sense weakness and will take advantage of it. As we see they have.

Which they will use those areas to attack the Ukraine at some future date, 5-10 years from now. Once the build up their forces. This may take some time. At this point reports are the Russian invaders have lost about 50% of their forces.

All that being said, the US & NATO should NOT have any troops on the ground in Ukraine. Their deployment on NATO nations along the borders is as far as they should go.

So yes, COA #1 is really the only way to go.

I don't expect bold actions by our politicians.

Sadly it appears that way it was/is across the board.

Yes, politicians don't do bold.

They rarely do anything but collect their paychecks, etc. And forget about "we the people" … They are beholden to "the Party" and those that send them a lot of money for their next election.

Tort … I have to agree with much of what is said negatively about our top leadership. As I have said they don't have the right stuff. And our enemies know it …

"…SAID he is a Republican addressing Republicans. What's the problem?"

Then why bring it here, where we have diverse, thoughtful opinion?
Just pose the options and solicit answers. Don't skew opinion from the start with a prejudice.
And what is your answer?

And as for option 4, is that really true? Perhaps we've judged it as close as we feel possible. Any more might push Putin to wildly escalate. What is "…the right stuff…" in this case? Thoughts?

Tort, okay, sorry. Schlicter is a lawyer these days, and of course a ferocious blogger with a taste for snark. But he used to be a colonel, I believe, in the US Army, is a war college grad, and did a tour in Ukraine training them. That's the basis for his evaluation.

Fwiw I very much agree with his comment that we are running out of ammunition and also PATIENCE; the AMerican people have lost their taste for forever wars. Option One isn't going to work.

Thanks doc, sorry I got a little testy. He is right that we are tired. I was aware of his service, which gives him some credibility, I agree.

Legion, you know I want Ike to return from the grave. We have not been blessed with that kind of leadership in a long time.

I think Putin and Xi would like to see the current president replaced. He has given them nothing. They will see what happens in 2024. But it's 20 years until the next Eisenhower grows up.

I don't think the American people have lost patience with this war. We have no (acknowledged) boots on the ground so its … different. There's no direct connection for the average American, just offering support for a (perceived) innocent country attacked by the old enemy. And most support that it seems.
My father-in-law works for Lockhed Martin, and I can say for a FACT, they love it.

Multiple polling shows continued support for aid to Ukraine is supported by a strong majority of Americans.

I think it is a European problem and should be handled through and by NATO. Support the Poles and other allies. When I was a teacher, I learned the futility of caring more about a kid's problems than the kid did. We can no longer be the Big Brother protecting everybody.

Legion, you know I want Ike to return from the grave. We have not been blessed with that kind of leadership in a long time.

Amen to that !

My father-in-law works for Lockhed Martin, and I can say for a FACT, they love it.

War is good for business
War is bad for business

But no matter how bad it gets someone makes a profit …

Multiple polling shows continued support for aid to Ukraine is supported by a strong majority of Americans.

But will those in charge & high places feel the same ?

I think it is a European problem and should be handled through and by NATO. Support the Poles and other allies.

Yes and remember the US is in NATO too. The plan should be for the US/NATO continued support, even IMO speed up the support. The US & NATO don't have to fight the Russians. The Ukraine is doing very well, but the US needs to give the Ukraine everything they need to take their nation back.

For the flies will come to the open honey.
And should war and hell have the same dimensions,
Both have been paved with the best intentions
And both are as full of profiteers.

Indeed … as I posted – Someone is always going to make a profit.

So doc, what is your opinion on the amount of aid we are giving the Ukrainians?

Tell Russia if they don't sit down to negotiate in 30 days, then we will impose drastic economic and diplomatic sanctions and will provide whatever it takes to Ukraine.

Considering the amount of economic and diplomatic sanctions already placed over the last 1.5 years, I would not count the threat of more of them having much of an impact in Kremlin decision making. At least unless a good number of countries that have so far avoided joining the sanctions would take part.

Drafting the disabled and students is the next ukrain plan to build up their forces, it really does seem as if the us and eu are determined to fight to the last ukranian. Carry on sending
taxpayer $. USD Sanctions? Do you realise the eu is still buying millions of LNG (gas) from russia? The rest of the world looks on and can see the real reason is for the proxy war.