"A View From the Trenchline" Topic

"Earlier this year, while funding for military aid to Ukraine was stalled in the U.S. Congress, critics of the Biden administration rightly pointed out that their country was now more than two years into bankrolling this war, yet their government still had no strategy for how that money was being spent. The critics' argument was understandable. Because Kyiv had not translated previous aid packages into a clear battlefield victory, the time had come for President Joseph Biden and his advisors to produce a definite strategy for victory in Ukraine. Otherwise, there was no sense in sending even more aid to yet another losing forever war.

Nor is it a contradiction that Ukraine will never possess the military capacity to defeat and push back the Russian army, let alone drive to the Sea of Azov or recapture Bakhmut, and yet rightfully and logically insist on seeking the whole of Ukrainian territory liberated. Was the battle of Avdiivka, for example, a worthwhile engagement for Ukraine, even though it is widely believed to have inflicted more Russian casualties than the decade-long campaign in Afghanistan? It is a difficult calculation for leaders to make, because the war should not primarily be about fighting over visible towns, around hills, and across rivers, as these are merely the setting for the savage grinding between Ukrainian and Russian morale. As inevitably as every war eventually ends, the morale of the weaker side will at first flutter, and then shatter, leaving the defeated, either Ukrainian or Russian, in irrecoverable humiliation…"

Main page

link

Armand

It depends on how both parties define victory and what they were willing to sacrifice to achieve it. Ukraine does not have to drive out the Russians to regain their territory. The Russian army could route or disintegrate due to internal collapse ( i.e. World War One). A negotiated peace after government change. It might just boil down to breaking Russian will to continue.

However a negotiated peace and sacrifice of territory is also a possibility. I believe any peace agreement would only be temporary for Ukraine, Russia would never honor it.

There are a couple other reasons to continue to support Ukraine even if they are going to lose…. What I am about to say will evoke emotional responses but I am proposing my theories with no moral lense of good and evil…

1. It buys our NATO Allie's time to rearm and face the new reality Russia has imposed on them.

2. If Ukraine sufficiently bleeds Russia it can buy a generation of peace. Russian ethnicity demographic is collapsing and whacking a few million men from their gene pool might prevent Russian resurgence as a great power while dulling their appetite for war.

Why should the US produce a strategy for a war to which we are not a party?

This is one reason why I dislike the uniparty so much: a generation of bureaucrats, enabled by the delegation doctrine and the distraction of the executive, have pursued policy on a semi-independent basis, without much in the way of effective supervision from anyone.

The result is repeated heavy investment by the bureaucracy in foreign wars for causes that the average American simply doesn't care very much about- and that the country as a whole has little interest in.

@Nine Pound Round

Isolationism is growing more popular in the USA. The average American cares more about domestic issues like inflation than geo politics or some long term global view. I wonder if Trump is elected will he disengage from Ukraine? I was listening to a podcast claiming Biden wanted to do the same but decided to wait until after the election because he does not want a failed policy flaring up on his watch right before the election. Just theories nothing substantial or proven by a reliable source, internet chatter…

Echoing Dragon Gunner on the moral lens….

Ukraine has seriously weakened one of our most historic enemies and exposed it as a less than fully modern conventional military power, given us technical info, reunited and strengthened NATO, sealed off Putin geographically even more, forced him to expend huge amounts of resources to the point where he has to go to North Korea and China for help. They have their own issues, their help is not a decisive factor.

All this without losing American lives in a war. Cynical, but IMO, the reality. The nation we have worried the most about as a foe for the last 70 years has hit a snag in its comeback trail. Ukraine is paying the most tragic price. By helping them we support their sovereignty and security in Europe while hitting Russia without direct intervention.

Tortorrella +1

Tortorella + 2

Armand