Size Matters – On A U.S. Ground Intervention In Ukraine

Source: Moon of Alabama.

Recent reports that battlefield conditions in Ukraine are unfavorable to the prospect of Ukrainian victory are inspiring some commentators to explore the possibility of a U.S.-led invasion to end the war decisively. Moon of Alabama thinks a U.S. invasion is unlikely.

I hope MoA is right.

148 thoughts on “Size Matters – On A U.S. Ground Intervention In Ukraine

    1. ” Enough people have died already.”

      Yet you only blame the guy defending his country and those who support them. The invader gets a pass from you.

      And don’t give me the “There are no good guys in this” argument. It is horse hockey.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. You can’t be that dense. You’re just building straw men.

        Blame is irrelevant.

        Throwing away lives without changing the outcome is needless waste of life.

        And just as importantly, we have no national interest in this fight. Which corrupt thugs control Eastern Ukraine doesn’t really matter. Let people be governed by the thug of their choice.


          1. Well, since opposition parties, opposition press, and even churches not toeing the official line are banned, how do you think you know the Ukrainians want continued war?

            You only hear what Zelensky or his backers, want you to hear.


          2. Seeing as Ukrainian fighters are going to the front lies of their own accord while Russia ships in mercenaries and criminals, it seems pretty clear if the Ukrainian people support the idea of NOT falling under Russian control.


          3. “They closed the borders because men were fleeing”

            No, they closed the borders as part of the general mobilization in the immediate aftermath of the Russian invasion. Of course, Ukraine has draft evaders but a small number compared to the mass exodus from Russia. Forbes reported that the number was 700,ooo and even Russia admits it is several hundred thousand.

            Liked by 1 person

          4. And you only BELIEVE what Putin and HIS backers say.

            Who is more believable: The guy who told Trump that his intel agencies were lying to him, or the guy who goes to the front line and works his tail off to get his army what it needs?

            Liked by 1 person

          5. “Trump’s intel agencies lied to all of us.”

            So now you admit that Trump’s administration was full of incompetency? Long time coming. DO you feel better now acknowledging the truth?

            But now you are believing Putin? Who not only suppresses dissent in his country. He has them jailed, disappeared or conveniently slip out of windows from high floors.


          6. “I would believe Putin before I believed the 50 Intelligence officials who flat out lied about Hunter’s laptop.”

            Then you are a total dope. There was not a single “flat out lie” in the letter they published and were zero active intelligence officials in that list of 51 FORMER officials.

            And they did not lie. Their letter was full of disclaimers and its speculative nature was very clear. From their letter . . .

            “We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not, and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement—just that our experience makes us deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case”

            The provenance of the laptop was fishy. These officials said so.


          7. But it wasn’t fishy, the FBI knew it was valid.

            Weasel words don’t excuse the lie. They worded the letter so that the press could claim it refuted the laptop


          8. Baloney, The repairman had the signed work order. No one else had custody.

            As I wrote, weasel words, to give them an out, The letter as a whole was a lie, to cast doubt on the authenticity of evidence they knew was true.


          9. “Baloney, the repairman had the signed work order. No one else had custody”

            Says who? Rudi Giuliani?

            You people are fuming and whining because your October surprise was too clever by half and it fizzled. As it should have. There was nothing new or relevant to the candidacy of Joe Biden on it.

            There is not a single lie in the letter. Not one. It could not have been more clear what it was and what it wasn’t. Your accusation of “blatant” lying is a LIE. Something you people do a lot of.


          10. As I said, weasel words. Which news outlet printed or read the entire letter to its clients without comment? None.

            What was universally reported was that 50 former intelligence agents said the laptop was Russian disinformation. Do you think even 1% of voters dug into it enough to critically read the actual letter?

            This was election tampering without voter fraud, just voter deception.

            Giuliani had a digital copy of the hard drive, the FBI had the original, which it buried for 6 months.

            But I note that you see hearsay by know Russian agents in the Steele dossier as evidence but a laptop with a verified chain of custody as gossip.

            Anything to protect the Biden Crime Family.


          11. “Which news outlet printed or read the entire letter to its clients without comment? None.”

            How the letter was handled by news outlets does not make it a lie. Duh! And for every one that played it up, I can find one that played it down. Or lied about it. To fool people like you.

            So, if you want to criticize media, criticize the right wing media that then – and now – prints stories saying that these fifty people LIED. They did not. It was a bona fide and honest note of caution given the FACT of various attempts by Russia to boost Donald Trump.


          12. There is no sharp line between the media, the deep state and the Democratic party.

            The letter was crafted by Democrat and deep state actors to provide a basis for media misrepresentation.

            It’s all one cooperative cabal.


          13. “It’s all one cooperative cabal.”

            You start with a LIE and end up with conspiracy theory insanity. No need for me to comment on what THAT says about you.


          14. “Do you think even 1% of voters dug into it enough to critically read the actual letter?”

            Whose fault is that?

            You’re admitting the letter was truthful but because people didn’t read all two pages it was a lie?

            Really? The logic seems lopsided.

            Liked by 1 person

          15. I’m saying the carefully vague letter was intentionally created to give credence to the media lie. All great lies contain some truth to carry the lie.


          16. And crafted to give cover to “journalists” spreading Democrat propaganda.

            You are fooling no one in trying to separate that letter from its place in the effort to shield the Biden Crime family from exposure.


          17. “You are fooling no one”

            With your lies and slanders.
            A hater has got to hate and that is all you have got.

            Sure, the letter was written with a political purpose – to deaden the attempted October surprise by the scumbags who had it in their possession for months before breaking the story in THEIR part of the MSM. But having a political purpose does not change the truth into lies. There is no lie and as of its writing in October 2020, there was plenty of reason to suspect a Russian hand in the squirrelly provenance and contents. There still is.

            You started this subject by comparing fifty respected Americans unfavorably to the murderous fascist dictator Putin. That says all that anybody needs to know about you. And, FWIIW, it says nothing good. It says Dishonest, delusional, and demented. You LIE about there being blatant lies in the letter. You defend yourself with nonsense conspiracy theories. And you refer to our President as being the head of a crime family. Dishonest, delusional, and demented. In spades.

            Liked by 1 person

          18. “Well, they certainly did more to mislead the American electorate than Putin did.”
            You mean the liars who have convinced you that the laptop has evidence of a scandal?

            BTW, Putin’s technique is very close to what the MAGA movement does. Exacerbate divisions. It does not always require disinformation. He has used the same technique in several countries and has had success. Donald Trump and Brexit are notable examples.


          19. You are sounding like a conspiracy theorist. Politics is about selling your ideas for votes. The right pitched the laptop story with little corroboration or even support from the journalists who broke the story. If a pitch says that the laptop had earmarks of Russian propaganda, and it did, then countering that is up to the opponents until verification. If the opposition had the laptop or its clone for 6 months and did nothing, whose fault is that? There were plenty of powerful media outlets, with the biggest reach in some cases like FOX and Sinclair, that could have blasted that story ad nauseum. Are they in on it too?

            Liked by 1 person

          20. “Each part of the cabal . . .”

            Not the same ridiculous push poll again? Really?

            Kind of like asking . . . “Would it have changed your vote if you had known as we do now that Donald Trump had forcibly raped several women?”


          21. “Would it have changed your vote if you had known as we do now that Donald Trump had forcibly raped several women?”

            That poll would not have changed any minds. Even Evangelicals. In fact, it might have improved his chances had he raped some more. That is the MAGA of today.

            Liked by 1 person

          22. I tried to find the methodology of the poll from MRC to little avail.

            Sorry, in my book, you have no case. A poll like that would have been big news perhaps from Pew or other rigorous pollsters.

            Liked by 1 person

          23. The vast majority who thought the laptop was important were Republicans. About the same percentage who believed in Italian satellite election fraud and its corollaries.

            No surprise there. I didn’t see how many would have changed their votes.

            Liked by 1 person

          24. But nothing indicated that votes would have changed, just that the same number of Republicans that believe election conspiracies believe the laptop importance.

            Don’t worry, the priorities of the House now are to get Hunter, go after M&M’s, grooming and CRT.

            Reminds me that we will see some serious tap dancing as the “Weaponization” committee skirts the Durham/Barr/Trump abuses.

            Liked by 1 person

          25. We do, that is why so many are dying.

            And that is what Russia is doing to its conscripts and prisoners by sending human waves of expendable citizens to give Putin a “victory high” at great cost.

            Liked by 2 people

          26. RE: “Do we really know if the people in Ukraine are behind this war without end?”

            In my experience, people here in this Forum adamantly DON’T want to know anything about the answer to that question. When I post amateur videos that feature Ukrainian citizens giving their opinions on the matter (a) no one believes them and (b) I get called names.


          27. Interviews of a few selected Ukrainians hardly represent a country. I think that there are those who don’t want war no matter the reason. There are collaborators. And there are actors in a propaganda war.

            The Russian attacks all over the country, not just the two Oblasts they wanted originally, the brutality of the occupiers, the forced removal to Russia of Ukrainians and nearly a decade of Russian attacks by Russian military are not going to endear them to Ukrainians.

            Would you surrender if we were invaded or support the effort to chase out the occupiers?

            Millions of Ukrainians have died and suffered under various Russian dictators. I think they have a just cause. And the threat to Europe by expanding Russian borders closer is not acceptable.

            So I would allow the Ukrainians the right and the resources to stay out of Putin’s empire.

            PS: I get called names and personal insults too. That is the nature of todays blogs unfortunately. I left Dougherty because they had no use for facts or even contrary opinions.

            But I did endure as the liberal whipping boy for a while. Insults didn’t drive me out. Insipid comments did. C’est la vie.

            Liked by 2 people

          28. RE: “Interviews of a few selected Ukrainians hardly represent a country.”

            Like I said, people here in this Forum adamantly DON’T want to know anything about the answer to that question. You, for example, would refuse to pay attention to a human being because one person hardly represents a country.


          29. What is your point? That one
            person speaks for all Ukrainians? Or two or even 10?

            I’ll let Ukrainians speak through their elected leaders when survival is at stake. Just like we do here.

            Liked by 2 people

          30. “I’ll let Ukrainians speak through their elected leaders”…

            Not to mention the ACTIONS of the Ukrainian people who don’t have the time to post YouTube videos because they are too engaged in fighting for their freedom.

            Liked by 1 person

          31. “Do we really know if the people in Ukraine are behind this war without end?”

            Yes, we do.

            There is no way they could have achieved what they have against this cruel invader if the war effort was not supported by the people.

            Liked by 2 people

          1. Blame is irrelevant to the sunk cost fallacy.

            Only the outcome matters. If sacrificing more lives will not change the outcome then wasting another life is inexcusable.

            It doesn’t matter who the good guys are.


          2. “If sacrificing more lives will not change the outcome . . .”

            The people who are facing the invaders and risking their lives every day do not agree that Russian victory is inevitable. That has been the Putin-lover narrative that did not stand up to the realities of war.

            Liked by 1 person

          3. You just can’t help building straw men,

            Having the belief that Russia is going to get what it wants, and wasting more lives will not change that, does not make one a Putin Lover.

            But if you love Zelensky so much, get yourself a green shirt and a rifle, and go join the fight.

            Cheerleading for others to lose their lives for a cause you believe in is not a noble position.


          4. Noble position?

            It is always some sort of personal attack with you people.

            You think wanting to stab Ukraine in the back puts you on the moral high ground? I strongly disagree.

            Unlike you people, I have NEVER said what Ukraine SHOULD do. My “noble position” from the start involves a mix of admiration for their courage and skill and the belief that our country should provide help if they ask for it. I do buy your Christian nationalist fantasies of a war with Islam as a reason for helping Russia. The threat is fascism. It is in our interests for it to fail. We should continue to punish Russia relentlessly until they reform their government as Ukraine has been trying to do. IMHO.

            Liked by 1 person

          5. Repeated accusations of being a Putin Lover when that has been explained to you dozens of times isn’t a personal attack?

            Russia is no threat to us, expansionist Islam is.

            But our continued provision of advanced weaponry cannot win that war, it can only prolong it and bleed both sides. We’re slaughtering a generation of Ukrainians and Russians because the military industrial complex needs something to keep busy.


          6. Not a Putin lover? Not a Donald Trump supporter either?

            And yet you constantly rationalize and excuse the outrages of both. In this case you want Putin to win and you give as your reason the looming threat from Islam. Uh, which countries has an Islamic state invaded?

            I used the term “Putin-lover” as an adjective to go with the word “narrative.” If you want to take it as a personal attack, that is on you. But the term “Putin-lover narrative” is a fair description of the claim that Russian victory is a certainty.

            “Russia is no threat to us”
            Other than the threat of nuclear destruction and very real and immediate threats to NATO countries on its borders. But, hey, while we are stabbing Ukraine in the back, why not Poland?

            Liked by 2 people

          7. Do I want Putin to win?

            I don’t care. That should be a matter decided by the disputed territories, not you or me.

            I do believe Putin will absorb the Eastern Oblasts as he stated from the beginning. That being the case, the fewer lives are lost to do so, the better.


          8. “Do I want Putin to win?”

            Following your stab Ukraine in the back policy would ensure that he does, so, yes, you do want Putin to win. Don’t pretend otherwise. You have already told us how we need him on our side for the next crusade against Islam.

            Liked by 1 person

          9. Regarding Islam . . .

            You did not answer the question – Which Islamic nation has invaded another country?

            Oh, you don’t want Putin to win? You just accept that he will if we stab Ukraine in the back. A distinction without a difference. You WANT to follow policies that WILL allow Putin’s fascist aggression against a peaceful neighbor to succeed. A calamity for Ukraine and for the civilized world.

            Liked by 1 person

          10. How is Putin’s annexation of the Eastern Oblasts fascist? You seem to call everyone you don’t like a fascist.

            If you wanted to go with imperialist, maybe.


          11. “How is Putin’s annexation of the Eastern Oblasts fascist?”

            His entire regime is fascist. He is fascist dictator.

            “You seem to call everyone you don’t like a fascist.”
            I use words according to their meaning even if you don’t.

            Liked by 1 person

          12. Putin is a thug and a kleptocrat, but I really don’t see fascism. He’s more like a Mafia Don with an Imperialist streak.

            Ukraine, on the other hand, has a long history of real fascists.


          13. There is indeed.

            I see bad people and discriminate between the types of bad people in order to determine how to deal with them.

            You see people you disagree with and call them fascists and think you have solved something.


          14. “You see people you disagree with and call them fascists and think you have solved something.”

            Uh, bullshit. I use words according to their meaning. You don’t. Just look at your tap dance this morning to avoid that very appropriate word for the nature of Putin’s regime. It is a fascist regime in everything except name.

            The real problem is that you will not use the right word for people you admire and want to succeed. Because fascism is an ugly word and fascism is an ugly thing.

            Liked by 1 person

          15. Fascism is also an economic system that marshals the country’s resources to support the State.

            Russia is run by oligarchs primarily driven by their own gain. A Fascist state would have taken their stuff and executed them by now if they objected.

            You just refuse to understand what fascism is because you support the collectivism it requires.


          16. Fascism is also an economic system that marshals the country’s resources to support the State.

            Uh, nope. It is not an economic system. It is a political system where the weak are required to serve the strong. You are confusing war-time economic measures with the inherent nature of fascist government. The fact that Russians slave away to enrich oligarchs does not mean it is not a fascist state. It is and is no different in terms of economic organization than Nazi Germany before the war kicked off. Labor suppressed. Bosses elevated and enriched.


            “Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation and race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.”

            Fits Putin’s Russia to a Tee.

            Liked by 1 person

          17. “I’ll trust the modern founder of fascism’s definition . . .”

            I thought Mussolini was a socialist? That not convenient today?

            I will come back to the point. I use words according to their definition. You don’t. Putin is a fascist and runs a fascist regime. For some reason, you are unwilling to accept that very clear fact.

            Liked by 1 person

          18. According to both Hitler and Mussolini, fascism is the perfection of socialism. To them, socialism wasn’t totalitarian enough. a form hand was needed to make it work.


          19. “Hitler and Mussolini, fascism is the perfection of socialism”

            You are making a rookie mistake by putting undue weight on political rhetoric. “Socialism” was seen as a good thing in 1930’s Europe so it affected the political rhetoric of politicians. The ACTUAL economic policies implemented once the fascist were in power were the polar opposite of the socialist ideal.

            Liked by 1 person

          20. Where has the “socialist ideal” actually been tried?

            Splitting hairs on the definition of fascism is pointless.

            Socialism, fascism, communism, call them what you want, they are all collectivism, placing the desires of the collective above the rights of the individual.

            They all end up the same, an authoritarian dictatorship and an enslaved people.


          21. “Socialism, fascism, communism”

            So, you define “socialism” very, very broadly and then equate it with fascism. Nice rhetorical trick. But pointless. Proposals for OUR country need to stand on their merits and not some label someone wants to evoke to scare the kiddies.

            Liked by 1 person

          22. “…placing the desires of the collective above the rights of the individual.”

            The moment you enter into relationships with other people to form a nation, the desires of the collective will supersede the rights of the individual. The question is how much infringement is tolerable. Our Bill of Rights sets that level in our Constitution.

            You can’t dump your sewage into a stream on your land. You can’t drive intoxicated even if you hurt no one. You can’t incite panic in public venues.

            But you have restated what I have held in the past. We can parse the evils of various types of economic systems, but a dictator is a dictator.

            Liked by 2 people

          23. No, Of course,

            “You can’t dump your sewage into a stream on your land. You can’t drive intoxicated even if you hurt no one. You can’t incite panic in public venues.”

            Because those things violate someone else’s rights.

            But when I collect my chickens eggs tomorrow, I violate no one’s rights by having eggs if they don’t.

            That’s where we differ, Another person’s lack of eggs is not my fault nor is it my obligation to provide their breakfast.


          24. “All of them”

            Hmm. They do not seem to know that. Time and again these “enslaved” people prove to be the happiest and most fulfilled in the world.

            We not “enslaved” people are way down the list of happy people. Maybe it is because we live lives of CONSTANT anxiety about some very basic human needs whereas they do not. They will never go bankrupt over medical bills. They are not stuck in jobs they hate because of health insurance. They can risk starting a business. Their children can afford higher education. Their old age pensions are secure. If they have a new-born they can spend some weeks with it. As employees, they get a minimu of five weeks paid vacation each year. They cannot be fired on a whim or to increase profits. etc. etc. etc.

            Liked by 1 person

          25. But they can’t express their religious beliefs in a public place silently without being arrested, among many other thought crimes and freedom of speech curtailments.

            They have only the illusion of freedom.


          26. Sorry, but arresting a woman for being in the boundaries of the clinic may not be a good look, but then neither is 5 cops killing a motorist.

            Cherry pick some more with greater care.


            Liked by 2 people

          27. How is Nichols relevant?

            I didn’t say they killed her.

            But that is just one of many examples of loss of political and religious freedoms we would see here as intolerable.


          28. “How is Nichols relevant?”

            Simple. You cherry picked what might be abusive policing in UK as an example of socialism and loss of rights.


            Now let’s look at the news and see what the rest of the world sees about us. Beating a motorist to death is not a good look.

            Liked by 2 people

          29. First, in each case, I stated the articles were speculative.

            Such articles sometimes prove true, sometimes not. They are offered to discourage jumping to conclusions.

            In this case, too many have jumped to the conclusion that policing, systemically, is racist. The caution that it may be personal in nature is appropriate.

            Politifact is wrong more often than right, I’ll wait for the police to check it out, until then it remains speculation


          30. “Politifact is wrong more often than right. . .”

            You have absolutely no evidence to support such a claim. You just don’t like that they frequently debunk the “conservative” bullshit that you people spread.

            Liked by 1 person

          31. Ad hominem?

            Uh, I said nothing about Duck-duck-go. It was YOUR offering this list of articles as evidence that I challenged. You will get a lot of hits to confirm your claim if you search for hits that confirm your claim. Mechanized cherry-picking. And nothing more.

            I followed your link. I saw a lot of garbage articles and whining by the same people that PolitiFact debunks. And all articles were anecdotal. There was no study that even pretended to quantify what percentage of PolitiFact articles are “wrong.”

            Liked by 1 person

          32. Since Politifact ratings are primarily opinion or analysis, rather than objective fact checks, it’s hard to get an accurate rating.

            I wish there were an accurate alternative.


          33. “I wish there were an accurate alternative.”

            There are quite a few organizations and newspapers that do fact checking. From what I have seen they generally come to similar conclusions.

            Liked by 1 person

          34. And your speculation is dangerous. And very often, inaccurate. And when PROVEN to be wrong, you ignore it and pretend you didn’t really say it. Or claim it was ONLY speculative, so you are therefore guiltless for spreading consipracy BS.

            Politifact proves YOU wrong more often than not.

            And you STILL have not taken responsibility for spreading the misinformation about the Pelosi attack.

            Liked by 1 person

          35. Again, I labeled it as speculation.

            Such article are helpful in slowing a rush to judgment. They aren’t always right, but they are always useful in making people look at alternatives.


          36. “If they don’t label it as speculative, yes.”

            How about if they are just asking questions as in . . .
            “We want to know, does Donald Trump pay for golden showers”

            Or if they report a fact . . .
            “Many people are saying that Donald Trump pays for golden showers.”

            Baseless speculation, asking loaded “questions” and reporting what “many people believe” is how “conservative” media feeds LIES into public discourse. Your spreading “speculation” about the Paul Pelosi attack is a prime example of how that works. Now a significant part of the public believes he was attacked by a gay lover or male prostitute because of these mere “speculations.”

            Liked by 1 person

          37. I doubt it was intentional. I have noticed that sometimes on touch pad devices like phones or iPads an icon can be touched inadvertently. I have corrected mine as soon as I saw a problem. The approved check mark changes to a pending approval almost without notice for example. The fault is obviously mine, fat old fingers, but I always catch it. I think.

            Nothing sinister I would guess.

            Liked by 2 people

          38. “ A Fascist state would have taken their stuff and executed them by now if they objected.”

            And many have if they displeased Putin and didn’t give him his due in return for monopolies.

            Dead, imprisoned or moved out of the country.

            Liked by 2 people

          39. “Don despises all Democrats”.

            “Not all people are Democrats.”

            “Some people Don despises are not Democrats.”

            “What time will the train from Cincinnati pass the train from Chicago if the conductor’s wife is pregnant?”

            I used to hate these quizzes in high school math.

            Liked by 2 people

          40. “The majority in the Eastern Oblasts blah blah blah”

            No they don’t. There has NEVER been an ethnic Russian majority in Donbas. And a lot of ethnic Russians would choose European values over the fascism of Putin.

            Liked by 1 person

          41. “So, an election denier, How Trumpian.”

            There was NO ELECTION. There was a completely illegal exercise organized by the invaders at the points of their guns. And that was after 80% of the pre-war population was either murdered or driven away – a pre-war population that had NEVER been majority ethnic Russian.

            Your refusing to acknowledge this simple truth, shows how you cannot be a conservative in good standing and intellectually honest.

            Here is a research challenge for you. How many people actually cast ballots in those illegal referenda? I have found nothing but absurd percentages reported by the fascist invaders. I suspect that the numbers are embarrassingly small which is why they are hidden.

            Liked by 1 person

          42. “Have you a more reliable election from the area?”
            Have you stopped beating your wife? There was NO “election.”

            “The Eastern Oblasts have been trying to break away for over a decade”
            No, they have not. You are thinking of a minority of gun-toting unreconstructed Soviet shitheads, Russian mercenaries, and out-of-uniform Russian troops trying to steal a portion of Ukraine for Putin.

            Liked by 1 person

          43. “The majority in the Eastern Oblasts”…

            You say it all of the time and it is inaccurate all of the time. Putting credence into an “election” that was not free nor fair is dangerous territory.

            Liked by 1 person

          44. You don’t think us striking Russian Nuke arms sites inside Russia “preemptively” either with nuclear or conventional weapons, would likely trigger war?


          45. “You don’t think us striking Russian Nuke arms sites inside Russia “preemptively” either with nuclear or conventional weapons, would likely trigger war?”

            Spin. Spin. Spin.

            Your statement – “Your hero calling for nuclear war” – was bullshit Russian propaganda.

            He did not talk about any particular targets such as “Russia Nuke arms sites.” He gave an off the cuff answer to a question that Russia took out of context and exaggerated.

            Liked by 1 person

          46. That is what I think also. The separatist movement was artificially induced by Putin just like he did in Georgia and Chechnya.

            Liked by 2 people

          47. “Early estimates of the death toll by scholars and government officials varied greatly. A United Nations joint statement signed by 25 countries in 2003 declared that 7–10 million perished. Current scholarship estimates a range of four to seven million victims with more precise estimates ranging from 3.3 to 5 million.“

            From your site.

            So tell me again why Ukraine should welcome Putin as a dictator? That genocide was close to the Holocaust in lives taken. Never again is a phrase already taken, but it certainly applies here. Especially with the brutality of the Russian army on daily display.

            Yeah, Europe wants Russia 500 miles closer to their sovereign nations so their women can be raped and children blown to pieces.

            As far as majority, Russification was a purposeful effort to dilute the population. Putin continues with offering, actually forcing, Russian passports, 750,000 or so, to increase the apparent Russian population.

            Liked by 2 people

          48. Don, if Ukraine looks at Russia as the enemy oppressor, then keeping them out of its internationally recognized borders is kind important to them. Camel’s nose?

            Liked by 2 people

          49. Russia didn’t invade just the Eastern Oblasts. If that is truly the case, why did they invade the entire country? Denazification? Illegitimate because the GOVERNMENT is not Nazi. Defending Russian speakers? The President of Ukraine is a Russian speaker and he is at the top of the hit list.

            Your reasons are all based in fallacies about Ukraine and its people. Those fallacies are because you put more trust in a despot ruler than in real people.

            Which also explains your hidden love of Donald Trump. Hidden from yourself, because you try to deny it, but the rest of us have seen it on display.

            Liked by 2 people

          50. “Why do you hate freedom for anyone but yourself?”

            It is not that they hate freedom. It is that they hate Democrats. They want our country – when lead by a Democrat – to fail at absolutely everything that it tries to do. That hatred is why the “conservatives” around here jumped on the Putin bandwagon from day one of the invasion. They say their support for Putin is about saving lives. If you buy that, I have stock in the Brooklyn Bridge I can let you have for a special price.

            Liked by 2 people

    2. RE: “The idea that we have to make new tanks to deliver to Ukraine is ridiculous. The Marines have hundreds of them they plan to phase out anyway.”

      I think the Pentagon procurement folks want to make sure that supplying Ukraine won’t deplete the active inventory. Since the tanks we supply to Ukraine will have to be refurbished to comply with export requirements, I imagine the procurement offices will try to arrange things so that the new tanks roll out ahead of the refurbished tanks.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s