Ukraine Always Get What You Want

The haunting images from Bucha have put me over the edge. And I can't help it wonder if the UN had existed when Hitler was rounding up Jews and systematically murdering them would the Security Council have sat there and talked about it, unwilling to engage because there were no treaties in place?

We knew Putin was committing war crimes, we know what he did in Mariupol were war crimes. But to see all those civilians butchered, to see the destruction of the town, to listen to the stories of the survivors ... I do not understand why we haven't declared war. Doesn't humanity demand it at this point, nukes be damned?

 

NATO (sorry, damn phone typo) has the treaties. The Security Council has Russia not only sitting on it, but the power to stop it by voting No on a resolution to against it. The UN cannot act as long as Russia has veto power and the Russians aren’t repeating their mistake in the Korea vote 70 years ago.

As for nukes be damned, that’s difficult. There are millions who would be damned. But at what point do we take that risk? Some here have said it’s long past. Others aren’t willing to go there. If Ukraine can win with us just providing supplies and intelligence, that is sure tempting over the possibility of having to evacuate every major NATO city. But will that all be enough?

I’m just a overly cautious SOB who read way too much about the Cold War fears and am very glad I’m not the one making those calls.

 

Agreed. But would we have sat and watched the concentration camps the way that we are sitting and watching Ukraine burn? When does the pull of evil become so clear that good people must stand against it?

 

Strong “but it was actually Antifa who stormed the Capitol” vibes in that video. Lying fascists of a feather flock together.

 

This is kind of an oversimplification, but until Pearl Harbor, we did.

 

We actually did. There was an active choice made to not go after the camps until they were targets of actual opportunity so we could focus on the war effort. And some evidence suggests (you’ll have to forgive me for specifics, it’s been going on 20 years since I took the Holocaust and the media class) that we knew Germany was up to nefarious things at the camps. We turned a boat load of Jews away too. Given the isolating nature of our country at the time, the camps were not going to change minds. That was just the US.

 

The plausibility doesn't matter, though. The whole point is to just throw up more smoke and give Russia and its friends cover to keep doing what they're doing. Same reason Chinese and Russian state media went all in on the Fort Detrick conspiracy theory and are now pushing new conspiracy theories about US biolabs in Ukraine, with all the useful Western idiots dutifully following suit.

 

That's pretty good.

Kasparov comments a lot tho.

 

I hadn't actually thought about it in that way. To me, there's no smoke-throwing in this at all. Hopefully, that makes me, well, not a Western idiot.

 

You're fine. I had a small number of very specific, very online people in mind there.

 

I'm one of the ones here who thought we should have done so, in a more direct way, some time ago. I've felt that we're letting Putin do what he wants, or at least, we're letting him think, rightly, apparently, that he can do whatever he wants, because we're all afraid of nuclear war. Rightly, as well, of course.

But the world is in a position that will never change now, because that nuclear threat/risk will always be there.

This is a dangerous (war) game, and certainly, we need to pick our battles. I would call Putin's bluff in this instance, though, because I don't think he or Russia wants to be destroyed in a nuclear war any more than anyone else. Also, Ukraine, if not its people, is actually of some value to him.

This fight is worth it for all the best reasons and highest ideals. It is also a conflict that Ukraine, and the rest of the world, needs to win. And I just think doing that is going to take more involvement from the U.S.

Toward that end, I'd start with gathering/giving Ukraine the planes -- and maybe even the pilots -- it needs to enforce a no-fly zone. And I'd make a concerted effort to find, capture and contain or kill Putin.

The United States' position in the world at this point is different than it was in WWII. Back then, it was, as Spartan Squad mentioned, isolated, and a country unto itself and standing apart from the rest of the world, separated primarily by geography. While that is still the case, geographically speaking, the U.S.'s standing in the world has changed exponentially since then. It is anything but isolated now -- unless you call isolation the lonely responsibility of being an undeniable world leader, a standing that was cemented by the end of WWII and which changed everyone's perception of America.

At that time, the U.S. surprised, shocked and awed everyone with the bold, previously unknown moves it made to end that war. Now, other allied or like-minded countries expect and hope for bold, powerful support from America, and may be shocked and awed not to receive it, even as they understand why it might be slower in coming. But that change in status, perception and expectation of the U.S. is indisputable and undeniable, and it changes things this time around.

 

How does "humanity demand it" when humanity itself potentially gets wiped off the face of the Earth if "nukes be damned". Jesus wept. That is so unbelievably naïve and dangerous.

Terrible things happen in the world all of the time. most often at the hands of nation-states, including our own at times. You don't threaten the end of humanity over a principle. That is itself inhumane if there's no humanity left to live out the principle.

You don't destroy yourself to save yourself. Why do you think every ideological struggle in the nuclear age was fought via proxy wars? Because a real world war between nuclear powers is far too dangerous.

Using World War II-era arguments is ridiculous. At no point in WWII was the very existence of the people on Earth ever at stake. It is now and it changes the dynamic, and yes, it changes the morals.

And anyone worried about the prestige of the United States or "our position in the world" needs to drive straight down to their recruitment office and sign up if you're that worried about it.

Prestige or position in the world is a bullshit and morally repugnant reason to fight a war and to kill for what amounts to our reputation. Our prestige is tied into our economic and military might that protects us from threats and nothing about that changes whether we flex that military might or not. The blood lust of those who think we need to prove our prestige makes my stomach turn.

We're handling this right. For all of its bluster, Russia knows its limits to date. It can't fuck with the NATO countries militarily (and this war is proving they are very lacking in the boots-on-the-ground military capability anyway) and it won't pull the trigger on economic reprisals because it can't afford to. It needs the western countries to pay for its fossil fuels as much as those countries need them.

Is it fair that Ukraine gets put on the cross in the bargain? No, but it wasn't fair when other nations were the victims of geopolitical power plays either ... and the atrocities that came out of them.

From a purely Machiavellian point of view? Let Russia get bogged down in Ukraine. Putin seriously stepped in it when he initiated this war out of hubris. Let the Ukrainians exact their vengeance and let the invasion be the rope he's hung with. Because even if Russia occupies Ukraine, they would still have to expend enormous resources just to hold it. Good luck with that.