Russia Invades Ukraine 2022

[temporal1]

Grace:
He comes across as weak and weakness always fosters [tempts?] aggression.
Considering Biden's incompetent exit from Afghanistan, and his obvious weak, addled inadequacy as President, is it any wonder Putin sees this time as a window of opportunity to carry out [his war-filled goals]? to cut through Ukraine.
and then start devouring little pieces of other countries.

i think a bit differently .. i’m not sure weakness “always” tempts aggression, but it often tempts aggression.

i’m not sure Putin expected war, nor am i convinced his aggression could not have been prevented or stopped before bloodshed.
i’m NOT certain. i sure wonder. because i hate to think the West’s hasty+heavy response escalated war/bloodshed. that weighs on me, i may never be certain. “what-ifs” are like that.

i crossed out the last because it’s speculation (very popular speculation) that escalates war, and for many, justifies full-on escalation!

it’s important to avoid making this worse than necessary.
for immediate talks, those involved need to focus on the problem at hand, not speculation, accusations, not rehashing former disputes. those of us outside can hope to avoid sabotaging resolution. (that includes biden and his unavoidable gaffs.)

what do you think?? ^^^

Grace:
Putin has no fear of Biden and figured taking Ukraine would be easy, like it was under Obama/Biden when he took Syria in 2012 and Crimea and eastern Ukraine in 2014.

maybe. again, i’m not convinced Putin expected this would be such a big deal (threats of WWIII, etc.) his stated goals for Ukraine seem mild, and do-able without military conflict.

my hope is, in future, he will NOT “go military,” but, also, that the West will address him/Russia with adequate diplomacy to PREVENT violence.

second, one modern factor of diplomacy is to engage potentional enemies to the point they see their personal investments outweigh military strikes. at this point, Putin/Russia must have an adequate indication of the price of economic sanctions. (keeping in mind, 2 can play the sanction game, too.)

Grace:
You have to wonder if Putin would have risked this war on Ukraine, if America had a big mouthed, unpredictable, aggressive,
wide awake leader, as its President.

one minor adjustment regarding the “big mouthed, unpredictable, aggressive” leader we have.
from his start as POTUS, his party+media have been censoring him, limiting air time, etc.
biden looks+sounds bad, and he always did. age has not been a cure.

- - - - - - -

it continues to deeply bother me that current U.S. presidents are kept from directly addressing citizens,
instead, we get “everyone else.”

it was before my time, but before television, presidents would go on radio to speak directly to the people.
no interference, no pundits saying before+after what would be said, what was said! people gathered around their radios and LISTENED. this is NOT an improvement.

presidents should speak directly to the people.
votes are for individuals, not committees behind the scenes with puppets reciting assigned scripts.

with biden, this poor practice of muzzling presidents should be openly recognized and soundly rejected.

i’m interested in your response.

[ohio jones]

it continues to deeply bother me that current U.S. presidents are kept from directly addressing citizens

There's more than one?

[temporal1]

it continues to deeply bother me that current U.S. presidents are kept from directly addressing citizens

There's more than one?

i began noticing this after the 2020 election, DJT was still POTUS, openly censored.
almost immediately, the same was happening to biden.

i think it’s a bad path.
if they are awful, let the people decide - in polling places.

[mike]

It appears that Russia's invasion of Ukraine isn't going well, at least if the goal was complete takeover of the country. The Ukrainians have held their capital city, are retaking some cities, and are managing some actual attacks against Russia on Russian territory.



The war has stale-mated.



Whether Russia will ultimately gather itself together and pull off a full invasion and takeover, it is important that at this juncture Russia has not realized the fears of some by utilizing chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons. It has been feared that Putin will do so if he ends up cornered militarily with no good off-ramp from this conflict.

[Ken]

Geraldo Rivera is a military expert or expert on Ukraine?

Who knew?!?

Of course the difference between today and WW2 or the Napoleonic Wars is that Russia was fighting with massive allies during those wars. Today it is alone. During WW2, for example, the Soviet Army that rolled across Eastern/Central Europe and Germany in 1944 and 1945 was a completely new and different army from the one that hung on by its fingernails at the gates of Moscow and Lenningrad in 1942 due largely to Lend Lease through which the US provided the USSR with:

400,000 jeeps & trucks
14,000 airplanes
8,000 tractors
13,000 tanks
1.5 million blankets
15 million pairs of army boots
107,000 tons of cotton
2.7 million tons of petrol products
4.5 million tons of food

The Germans were still using horse-driven wagons for infantry in 1944. The Russians had hundreds of thousands of Studebaker 4x4 army trucks for mobility in addition to US planes and tanks to supplement their own production.

Not to mention opening western and southern fronts through the invasions of Normandy and Italy.

[temporal1]

mike:
.. if the goal was complete takeover of the country. ..

that’s a big IF considering talks are reported to be revolving around a neutral Ukraine,
and, according to yesterday’s Gravitas video, Page 129, Ukraine has agreed to neutrality, along with other points.

the video is worth 5 min.

i don’t 100% ignore media or White House reports, hype, speculation, etc., but i try to keep 99% focus (and prayers) on the talks.
i don’t listen to G Rivera on any day of the week. ugh.

[mike]

Geraldo Rivera is a military expert or expert on Ukraine?

Who knew?!?

No. Posted the tweet for what it is worth: one person's opinion.

Of course the difference between today and WW2 or the Napoleonic Wars is that Russia was fighting with massive allies during those wars. Today it is alone.

Excellent point. However, I think that Geraldo may have a point in the fact that, with time, Russia may bring more of its full military might to bear on Ukraine; and given that Ukraine's allies are only contributing weapons in a limited way (no fighter planes for instance), Russia may yet pull off a victory.

[Ken]

Geraldo Rivera is a military expert or expert on Ukraine?

Who knew?!?

No. Posted the tweet for what it is worth: one person's opinion.

Of course the difference between today and WW2 or the Napoleonic Wars is that Russia was fighting with massive allies during those wars. Today it is alone.

Excellent point. However, I think that Geraldo may have a point in the fact that, with time, Russia may bring more of its full military might to bear on Ukraine; and given that Ukraine's allies are only contributing weapons in a limited way (no fighter planes for instance), Russia may yet pull off a victory.

The key, I think, is in defining what constitutes a victory for either Russia or Ukraine. And whether such a victory is worth the enormous costs that this war is generating on both sides.

[mike]

Geraldo Rivera is a military expert or expert on Ukraine?

Who knew?!?

No. Posted the tweet for what it is worth: one person's opinion.

Of course the difference between today and WW2 or the Napoleonic Wars is that Russia was fighting with massive allies during those wars. Today it is alone.

Excellent point. However, I think that Geraldo may have a point in the fact that, with time, Russia may bring more of its full military might to bear on Ukraine; and given that Ukraine's allies are only contributing weapons in a limited way (no fighter planes for instance), Russia may yet pull off a victory.

The key, I think, is in defining what constitutes a victory for either Russia or Ukraine. And whether such a victory is worth the enormous costs that this war is generating on both sides.

Right. I wonder what Putin really wanted to start with, and whether that has changed with the course of the invasion. I assume that what Ukraine wants is simple enough.

[temporal1]

mike:
.. may have a point in the fact that, with time, Russia may bring more of its full military might to bear on Ukraine;
and given that Ukraine's allies are only contributing weapons in a limited way (no fighter planes for instance), Russia may yet pull off a victory.

There are MANY unknowns.
As you say, Ukraine is responding with the full force the U.S./West ALLOWS, this could change at any moment.
So far, China and others do not seem immediately engaged, this could change at any moment.

i’m anxious for quick resolution - to avoid this getting ‘way worse, very quickly. if it did, it could last 20 years, and who knows what damage, and where, would be done.

i’ve seen so much in my life. i do not presume i’ll never witness nuclear bombs exploding on U.S. soil. i’m sorry to say.
frankly, i was expecting it from N Korea before Trump was elected. i REALLY expected it then. (from mainstream chatter.)
he’s gone, here they go again.

i guess i’m just stupid to put so much hope in those actually tasked with negotiations.
to try to discern facts THEY are working with, rather than hanging onto everyone’s worst fears. including my own.

mike:
.. I wonder what Putin really wanted to start with, and whether that has changed with the course of the invasion.
I assume that what Ukraine wants is simple enough.

From reports, Putin has been consistent. In the Gravitas video, Zelensky spoke, he does not seem mysterious.
The wild card appears to be the U.S., if there is one.

The power of the media to inflame+distort is just beyond the beyond.