How should west respond to potential (likely) Russian invasion of Ukraine?

[Jayjay]

I think most people are patriotic to some degree, in any country.

If Canada offered United States a tract of land to connect Washington with Alaska, at no cost, most Americans would probably agree that it's a nice thing to have, even if they lived in neither state. Bigger America, better America.

If there were a few Canadians who objected, their objections might be pushed aside because of greater good, and imagine all the trade and development it would cause. And Canadians speak English so they wouldn't even have to leave their homes, they'd just live in the US. And doesn't it make more sense to have each country be contiguous? That's better for everyone.

Now that you have the idea in your head that western coast of Canada belongs to the US, even if more Canadians objected, that would just seem like they're just being greedy. Maybe some of them even take arms, and start terrorizing America. Those ingrates. They should have their land taken from them for being so unreasonable.

And there you go. What patriotic American wouldn't support a special military operation to build a land bridge to Alaska? And unpatriotic Americans obviously shouldn't have a say in it, they're colluding with the enemy!

 

[marc]

Barbos's obsession with a handful of neo-nazis in Ukraine is cute.

It's like, should we be worried about the fascist state that tried to obliterate the culture of its neighbors and take their land and wealth through violent aggression in the 1940's, or the one doing it now in the 2020's?

I think if you could find more nazis at an average CPAC conference.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

I note that some intercepted phone calls from angry Russian soldiers in Ukraine have been intercepted. Disgusted by lack of equipment fuel, food and hopelessness, apparently some Russian soldiers are planning to desert starting on the 26th, Going home. Some are shooting them selves to be sent home. Stay tuned for this on the 26th. Meanwhile, estimates are being made that 30% of Russian, military personnel have been killed, wounded, or captured. How long can that keep going on?

 

[steve_bank]

I think most people are patriotic to some degree, in any country.

If Canada offered United States a tract of land to connect Washington with Alaska, at no cost, most Americans would probably agree that it's a nice thing to have, even if they lived in neither state. Bigger America, better America.

If there were a few Canadians who objected, their objections might be pushed aside because of greater good, and imagine all the trade and development it would cause. And Canadians speak English so they wouldn't even have to leave their homes, they'd just live in the US. And doesn't it make more sense to have each country be contiguous? That's better for everyone.

Now that you have the idea in your head that western coast of Canada belongs to the US, even if more Canadians objected, that would just seem like they're just being greedy. Maybe some of them even take arms, and start terrorizing America. Those ingrates. They should have their land taken from them for being so unreasonable.

And there you go. What patriotic American wouldn't support a special military operation to build a land bridge to Alaska? And unpatriotic Americans obviously shouldn't have a say in it, they're colluding with the enemy!

Alaska Highway - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Alaska Highway (French: Route de l'Alaska; also known as the Alaskan Highway, Alaska-Canadian Highway, or ALCAN Highway) was constructed during World War II to connect the contiguous United States to Alaska across Canada. It begins at the junction with several Canadian highways in Dawson Creek, British Columbia, and runs to Delta Junction, Alaska, via Whitehorse, Yukon. When it was completed in 1942, it was about 2,700 kilometres (1,700 mi) long, but in 2012, it was only 2,232 km (1,387 mi). This is due to the continuing reconstruction of the highway, which has rerouted and straightened many sections. The highway opened to the public in 1948.[1] Once legendary for being a rough, challenging drive, the highway is now paved over its entire length.[2] Its component highways are British Columbia Highway 97, Yukon Highway 1 and Alaska Route 2.

Put could probably hve negotiated a road to Russia's naval base.

 

[steve_bank]

I found some articles on Noam Chomsky's positions.

Noam Chomsky, Jeremy Scahill on the Russia-Ukraine War - Apr 14

Noam Chomsky: Trump Is The "One Western Statesman" Pushing For Diplomacy To End Ukraine War | Video | RealClearPolitics - May 1

Which is far too generous. The truth about Trump is much closer to what he said nearly six years ago: Noam Chomsky: "Hitler Was A Sincere, Dedicated Ideologue -- Trump Isn't" | Video | RealClearPolitics - 2016 Nov 29

Noam Chomsky Says Ukraine Desire for Heavy Weapons Is 'Western Propaganda' - May 13

NC seems like he is willing to give Vladimir Putin the sort of pass that he does not give to the US foreign-policy establishment.

At this point does nayone actually think Putin will negotite, and even if he did he coud be trusted?

The video of Trump passively sitting next to Putin kissing his ass saying he believes everything Putin says makes me sick as an American. Trump a western statesman, give me a break.

I was not aware Chompsky was a Trump fascist.

 

[Harry Bosch]

I found some articles on Noam Chomsky's positions.

Noam Chomsky, Jeremy Scahill on the Russia-Ukraine War - Apr 14

Noam Chomsky: Trump Is The "One Western Statesman" Pushing For Diplomacy To End Ukraine War | Video | RealClearPolitics - May 1

Which is far too generous. The truth about Trump is much closer to what he said nearly six years ago: Noam Chomsky: "Hitler Was A Sincere, Dedicated Ideologue -- Trump Isn't" | Video | RealClearPolitics - 2016 Nov 29

Noam Chomsky Says Ukraine Desire for Heavy Weapons Is 'Western Propaganda' - May 13

NC seems like he is willing to give Vladimir Putin the sort of pass that he does not give to the US foreign-policy establishment.

At this point does nayone actually think Putin will negotite, and even if he did he coud be trusted?

The video of Trump passively sitting next to Putin kissing his ass saying he believes everything Putin says makes me sick as an American. Trump a western statesman, give me a break.

I was not aware Chompsky was a Trump fascist.

Agreed. Russia can't be trusted. It's possible that Chomp is getting a little bit addled. The May 13 interview was bizarre.

 

[steve_bank]

My impression of Chomsky was a tenured professor not living in the real world.

If he really called Trump a statesman it reveals who he really is. Or he is entering old age dementia.

 

[Copernicus]

Boris Bondarev, counselor at the Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation to the United Nations, has resigned his post in protest over the February invasion of Ukraine. He has posted his resignation letter in his Linkedin account, and I am posting it here in its entirety. Bondarev is the highest level Russian official so far to voice public opposition to the war. Others have resigned but not made public statements. Unlike our outspoken self-appointed spokesman for Russia in this forum, Bondarev has actually been a spokesman for Russia over the past 20 years.

Long overdue, but today I resign from civil service. Enough is enough.

For twenty years of my diplomatic career I have seen different turns of our foreign policy, but never have I been so ashamed of my country as on February 24 of this year. The aggressive war unleashed by Putin against Ukraine, and in fact against the entire Western world, is not only a crime against the Ukrainian people, but also, perhaps, the most serious crime against the people of Russia, with a bold letter Z crossing out all hopes and prospects for a prosperous free society in our country.

Those who conceived this war want only one thing - to remain in power forever, live in pompous tasteless palaces, sail on yachts comparable in tonnage and cost to the entire Russian Navy, enjoying unlimited power and complete impunity. To achieve that they are willing to sacrifice as many lives as it takes. Thousands of Russians and Ukrainians have already died just for this.

I regret to admit that over all these twenty years the level of lies and unprofessionalism in the work of the Foreign Ministry has been increasing all the time. However, in most recent years, this has become simply catastrophic. Instead of unbiased information, impartial analysis and sober forecasting, there are propaganda clichés in the spirit of Soviet newspapers of the 1930s. A system has been built that deceives itself.

Minister Lavrov is a good illustration of the degradation of this system. In 18 years, he went from a professional and educated intellectual, whom many my colleagues held in such high esteem, to a person who constantly broadcasts conflicting statements and threatens the world (that is, Russia too) with nuclear weapons!

Today, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is not about diplomacy. It is all about warmongering, lies and hatred. It serves interests of few, the very few people thus contributing to further isolation and degradation of my country. Russia no longer has allies, and there is no one to blame but its reckless and ill-conceived policy.

I studied to be a diplomat and have been a diplomat for twenty years. The Ministry has become my home and family. But I simply cannot any longer share in this bloody, witless and absolutely needless ignominy.

Contacted by the Associated Press, Bondarev said he had no intention of leaving Geneva. Apparently, he is going into exile, but Putin may well send an execution squad out for him.

See WaPo story: ‘Ashamed’ Russian diplomat resigns over Putin’s ‘aggressive war’

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Barbos's obsession with a handful of neo-nazis in Ukraine is cute.

It's like, should we be worried about the fascist state that tried to obliterate the culture of its neighbors and take their land and wealth through violent aggression in the 1940's, or the one doing it now in the 2020's?

Well, he keeps calling for the denazification of Ukraine. From what we've seen the Ukrainian army is doing a pretty good job of that. Moscow keeps sending them, Ukraine denazifies them.

 

[steve_bank]

The history of Russian exiles and critical ex-pats says he may not be long lived.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Boris Bondarev, counselor at the Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation to the United Nations, has resigned his post in protest over the February invasion of Ukraine. He has posted his resignation letter in his Linkedin account, and I am posting it here in its entirety. Bondarev is the highest level Russian official so far to voice public opposition to the war. Others have resigned but not made public statements. Unlike our outspoken self-appointed spokesman for Russia in this forum, Bondarev has actually been a spokesman for Russia over the past 20 years.

Long overdue, but today I resign from civil service. Enough is enough.

For twenty years of my diplomatic career I have seen different turns of our foreign policy, but never have I been so ashamed of my country as on February 24 of this year. The aggressive war unleashed by Putin against Ukraine, and in fact against the entire Western world, is not only a crime against the Ukrainian people, but also, perhaps, the most serious crime against the people of Russia, with a bold letter Z crossing out all hopes and prospects for a prosperous free society in our country.

Those who conceived this war want only one thing - to remain in power forever, live in pompous tasteless palaces, sail on yachts comparable in tonnage and cost to the entire Russian Navy, enjoying unlimited power and complete impunity. To achieve that they are willing to sacrifice as many lives as it takes. Thousands of Russians and Ukrainians have already died just for this.

I regret to admit that over all these twenty years the level of lies and unprofessionalism in the work of the Foreign Ministry has been increasing all the time. However, in most recent years, this has become simply catastrophic. Instead of unbiased information, impartial analysis and sober forecasting, there are propaganda clichés in the spirit of Soviet newspapers of the 1930s. A system has been built that deceives itself.

Minister Lavrov is a good illustration of the degradation of this system. In 18 years, he went from a professional and educated intellectual, whom many my colleagues held in such high esteem, to a person who constantly broadcasts conflicting statements and threatens the world (that is, Russia too) with nuclear weapons!

Today, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is not about diplomacy. It is all about warmongering, lies and hatred. It serves interests of few, the very few people thus contributing to further isolation and degradation of my country. Russia no longer has allies, and there is no one to blame but its reckless and ill-conceived policy.

I studied to be a diplomat and have been a diplomat for twenty years. The Ministry has become my home and family. But I simply cannot any longer share in this bloody, witless and absolutely needless ignominy.

Contacted by the Associated Press, Bondarev said he had no intention of leaving Geneva. Apparently, he is going into exile, but Putin may well send an execution squad out for him.

See WaPo story: ‘Ashamed’ Russian diplomat resigns over Putin’s ‘aggressive war’

I could have written that letter. That guy is someone I can love. He cares about freedom and democracy and loves Russia, so he hates the little Russian Hitler and his cronies. He really called it like it is:

Those who conceived this war want only one thing - to remain in power forever, live in pompous tasteless palaces, sail on yachts comparable in tonnage and cost to the entire Russian Navy, enjoying unlimited power and complete impunity. To achieve that they are willing to sacrifice as many lives as it takes. Thousands of Russians and Ukrainians have already died just for this.

It's been reported that he has planned this for a while but waited until he could be sure that his family would be safe. The guy is a hero. He should join Ukraine's armed forces and probably would if he didn't have to kill witless conscripts and cannon fodder, people he actually cares about.

 

[ZiprHead]

Not very smart.

 

[bilby]

I found some articles on Noam Chomsky's positions.

Noam Chomsky, Jeremy Scahill on the Russia-Ukraine War - Apr 14

Noam Chomsky: Trump Is The "One Western Statesman" Pushing For Diplomacy To End Ukraine War | Video | RealClearPolitics - May 1

Which is far too generous. The truth about Trump is much closer to what he said nearly six years ago: Noam Chomsky: "Hitler Was A Sincere, Dedicated Ideologue -- Trump Isn't" | Video | RealClearPolitics - 2016 Nov 29

Noam Chomsky Says Ukraine Desire for Heavy Weapons Is 'Western Propaganda' - May 13

NC seems like he is willing to give Vladimir Putin the sort of pass that he does not give to the US foreign-policy establishment.

Noam Chomsky is just another cult leader. Why would anyone outside his cult care about his opinions?

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Your post makes zero sense. You don't like the Ukrainian Oligarchs. Fine. You don't like those oligarch meanies who now own rubble and ruin. Fine. Do you give a fucking shit about their families? How about all the innocent civilians? Their children? I donated money to a group that rescued hundreds of children dying of cancer that was finally evacuated. Their story was heart breaking. Do you give a shit about them? Do you give a shit about all the environmental damage that Russia is causing? Do you give a shit about the millions of people world wide who will suffer because Russia won't let Ukraine export their grain? How about the world wide inflation that is affecting the world? Have you been to the store lately?

Right there in your own post you gave the answer to your own question and you don't even know it. You said YOU donated money to a group. Find. I have absolutely no problem with that, and even commend it. But we're not talking about what YOU are doing, we are talking about what you and yours all want the government to do.

When it comes to that, your very emotional argument means nothing. "Don't you care about X? Don't you care about Y" Don't you care about deciding things on merits other than emotion?

It is because everything has been decided on emotion for the last 20 years that we are experiencing food shortages right now. Your "feelings" aren't going to feed the hungry, cold rational action will. And when you say "oh but I meant well", I won't give a damn about that.

Actually you won't say "oh but I meant well" because that would mean admitting that letting your feelings trump reality is wrong, and that feels bad so you won't do that.

 

[steve_bank]

Your post makes zero sense. You don't like the Ukrainian Oligarchs. Fine. You don't like those oligarch meanies who now own rubble and ruin. Fine. Do you give a fucking shit about their families? How about all the innocent civilians? Their children? I donated money to a group that rescued hundreds of children dying of cancer that was finally evacuated. Their story was heart breaking. Do you give a shit about them? Do you give a shit about all the environmental damage that Russia is causing? Do you give a shit about the millions of people world wide who will suffer because Russia won't let Ukraine export their grain? How about the world wide inflation that is affecting the world? Have you been to the store lately?

Right there in your own post you gave the answer to your own question and you don't even know it. You said YOU donated money to a group. Find. I have absolutely no problem with that, and even commend it. But we're not talking about what YOU are doing, we are talking about what you and yours all want the government to do.

When it comes to that, your very emotional argument means nothing. "Don't you care about X? Don't you care about Y" Don't you care about deciding things on merits other than emotion?

It is because everything has been decided on emotion for the last 20 years that we are experiencing food shortages right now. Your "feelings" aren't going to feed the hungry, cold rational action will. And when you say "oh but I meant well", I won't give a damn about that.

Actually you won't say "oh but I meant well" because that would mean admitting that letting your feelings trump reality is wrong, and that feels bad so you won't do that.

If you need a few bucks for food let me know.

You ignore the obvious. Our stability and prosperity is linked to European stability. It is inescapable. Putin and the old Soviets are and were hell bent on disrupting Europe.

Without NATO first Ukraine and then more.

 

[Elixir]

As we see, one reason Putler wants Ukraine is that it would give him the ability to disrupt global food supplies at will, any time anyone tries to interrupt his quest for a global Russian empire.

 

[ZiprHead]

Translation:

This war, guys, just so you understand; this war is not for Ukraine. Not for gas, not for oil, not for <unaudiable>, not even for Crimea, not for any this ****. This war is for the future of the white nation, for the future of the white civilization, for the future of white Russia. If we **** this up, it's over! There will be no more of our civilization. It's the ******* end of the white civilization. Because we are all that've remained (of real white people). <unaudiable> What did others think before? We are the white nation, white Europe, white America. What the **** is going on there now? Arabs, ******* *******, and chin** crawled out of all the cracks, and all of us are faggots! ******* men in dresses, all suck *******' dicks. What is this? Where the **** is the white nation? Where is the pure white blood there? No, there's no one else left! Therefore, the whole world is against us. That is why it's happening now: we are the last ******* bastion of the white man. This war is for our blood. This war is for our genetics. This war is for our great (white) nation to continue to exist; for great white Russia to continue to live. To have a ******* white man's future! That is what we're fighting for. And only in this way. Only in this ******* way, only a white Russian man, a powerful warrior, can build the great Russian empire and preserve the future so that the white nation continues to exist on this planet. That is our ******* mission. That is why we are here. Neither Kyiv, **** it all. Russia for Russians, white Russia for Russians.

Wagner Group: Russian semi-governmental military organization led by a guy with an SS uniform tattooed onto his body

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

You ignore the obvious. Our stability and prosperity is linked to European stability. It is inescapable. Putin and the old Soviets are and were hell bent on disrupting Europe.

Without NATO first Ukraine and then more.

And now the domino theory is back. I did read one rather insane rant talking about how the US needed to help Ukraine because otherwise Putin would have troops march all the way to Spain.

 

[Jayjay]

ISW reports in its daily war update that the "All-Russian Officers Assembly" is demanding tougher actions from the Russian military:

Russian nationalist figures are increasingly criticizing the failures of Russia’s “special military operation” in Ukraine and are calling for further mobilization that the Kremlin likely remains unwilling and unable to pursue in the short term. The All-Russian Officers Assembly, an independent pro-Russian veterans’ association that seeks to reform Russian military strategy, called for Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Kremlin to declare war on Ukraine and introduce partial mobilization in Russia on May 19. The Assembly said that Russia’s “special military operation” failed to achieve its goals in three months, especially after the failed Siverskyi Donets River crossings. ISW previously assessed that the destruction of nearly an entire Russian battalion tactical group (BTG) during a failed river crossing on May 11 shocked Russian military observers and prompted them to question Russian competence. The Assembly’s appeal called on Putin to recognize that Russian forces are no longer only “denazifying” Ukraine but are fighting a war for Russia’s historic territories and existence in the world order. The officers demanded that the Kremlin mobilize all regions bordering NATO countries (including Ukraine), form territorial defense squads, extend standard military service terms from one year to two, and form new supreme wartime administrations over Russia, the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics (DNR and LNR), and newly occupied Ukrainian settlements. The officers also demanded the death penalty for deserters.

The Assembly’s letter may be a leading indicator of elements of the Russian government and society setting informational conditions to declare partial mobilization. However, the Kremlin has so far declined to take this step likely due to concerns over domestic backlash and flaws in Russia’s mobilization systems. The All-Russian Officers Assembly called on Putin to recognize the independence of the DNR and LNR three weeks prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, setting conditions for the Russian “special military operation.”

Notable is that the "denazification" bullshit is dropped and now it's a war about Russia's historical borders. Sure, this isn't the government talking, but it's also not good news, because it's not like they're criticizing the war or its sensibility, but rather the execution and are calling for harsher measures. The way I see it, Russia will either have to withdraw or mobilize, and it will eventually choose the latter (although it could be done gradually and secretly, not necessarily even calling it "mobilization")... and the longer they much about it, the better the Ukrainian position will be.

I think ISW is being a bit disingenuous about the latter part. The letter that it quotes from before the war as saying Russia should recognize DNR and LNR also says that external threats "are not critical at the moment, and do not pose a direct threat to the existence of Russian statehood and its vital interests", and that "NATO forces are not amassing or displaying any threatening activity". It was overall against an all-out war and extremely prescient in predicting what actually happened. From the letter, dated Feb 1st 2022:

The use of military force against Ukraine will, first of all, call into question Russia’s very existence as a state. Second, it will turn Russians and Ukrainians into mortal enemies. Third, thousands (tens of thousands) of young, healthy people will die on both sides, which will naturally have an effect on the future demographic situation in our dying countries. On the battlefield field – if there is a battle – Russian troops will face not just Ukrainian soldiers, many of whom will be [ethnically] Russian, but also NATO troops and equipment, while NATO member states will be obligated to declare war against Russia. Turkish President Recep [Tayyip] Erdogan has been clear about whose side Turkey will be on. And we can assume that Turkey’s two field armies and its fleet will be ordered to “liberate” the Crimea and Sevastopol and, possibly, to invade the Caucasus. In addition, there is no doubt that Russia will be added to the category of countries that pose a threat to peace and international security, subjected to the most severe sanctions, transformed into a pariah in the eyes of the international community and probably lose the status of an independent state.

(...)

We, Russia’s officers, demand that the Russian president abandon the criminal policy of provoking a war in which Russia will find itself alone against the united forces of the West and create conditions for implementing Art. 3 of the Russian Constitution and resign.

Quite a different tone back then. Instead of calling people to oppose war, now the organization is calling for escalation.

 

[DrZoidberg]

You ignore the obvious. Our stability and prosperity is linked to European stability. It is inescapable. Putin and the old Soviets are and were hell bent on disrupting Europe.

Without NATO first Ukraine and then more.

And now the domino theory is back. I did read one rather insane rant talking about how the US needed to help Ukraine because otherwise Putin would have troops march all the way to Spain.

It's not so much domino theory as giving resistance. Just like Hitler, Putin will keep trying to grab stuff until he is stopped. If he isn't stopped, then yes, he will just keep going. When Russia grabbed Crimea the international community just bent over and took it. He then later is trying to take the rest of it. If the International community would have offered any pushback then I am sure the current war wouldn't have happened.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

It's not so much domino theory as giving resistance. Just like Hitler, Putin will keep trying to grab stuff until he is stopped. If he isn't stopped, then yes, he will just keep going. When Russia grabbed Crimea the international community just bent over and took it. He then later is trying to take the rest of it. If the International community would have offered any pushback then I am sure the current war wouldn't have happened.

Even Kiss-my-ass Kissinger is saying that Ukraine is going to have to give up territory to have peace. Sounds like Chamberlain talking about Hitler. Ukraine is nothing short of a modern day Thermopylae. Folks like Kissinger are so drunk and satiated on power that their brains are addled.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Your post makes zero sense. You don't like the Ukrainian Oligarchs. Fine. You don't like those oligarch meanies who now own rubble and ruin. Fine. Do you give a fucking shit about their families? How about all the innocent civilians? Their children? I donated money to a group that rescued hundreds of children dying of cancer that was finally evacuated. Their story was heart breaking. Do you give a shit about them? Do you give a shit about all the environmental damage that Russia is causing? Do you give a shit about the millions of people world wide who will suffer because Russia won't let Ukraine export their grain? How about the world wide inflation that is affecting the world? Have you been to the store lately?

Right there in your own post you gave the answer to your own question and you don't even know it. You said YOU donated money to a group. Find. I have absolutely no problem with that, and even commend it. But we're not talking about what YOU are doing, we are talking about what you and yours all want the government to do.

When it comes to that, your very emotional argument means nothing. "Don't you care about X? Don't you care about Y" Don't you care about deciding things on merits other than emotion?

It is because everything has been decided on emotion for the last 20 years that we are experiencing food shortages right now. Your "feelings" aren't going to feed the hungry, cold rational action will. And when you say "oh but I meant well", I won't give a damn about that.

Actually you won't say "oh but I meant well" because that would mean admitting that letting your feelings trump reality is wrong, and that feels bad so you won't do that.

You bet I get emotional about it. I have family members (in-laws) in Europe that have a Ukranian family living with them. I've heard the stories. I pretty much agree with President Biden on almost his actions in aiding Ukraine today. A weakened Russia will likely not invade a NATO country. If Nato is attacked, it's WW3. And we're screwed. But bottom line, I believe that sovereign countries should not be invaded. Period. End of story. I would support Ukraine even if Russia weren't threatening NATO. I think that we should arm and resupply Ukraine to the greatest extent possible. Mostly with defensive weapons. But they need longer range weapons to take out Russian artillery in Ukraine. I would understand; but I would not support Ukraine attacking Russia land. I think that the west should do everything possible to encourage Russia to return home. This would include massive sanctions. Bankrupt the fuckers. I think that we also need to figure out a way to get the grain out of Ukraine. The grain needs to be shipped out via Odessa. If we don't figure out a way, millions could starve. At this time, the only way that i see to do this is to send the Russian ships around Odessa to the bottom of the ocean. The Ukrainians could accomplish this hopefully with better longer range anti-ship missiles and better intelligence.

If you know a better way to peace - I'm all ears!

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Your post makes zero sense. You don't like the Ukrainian Oligarchs. Fine. You don't like those oligarch meanies who now own rubble and ruin. Fine. Do you give a fucking shit about their families? How about all the innocent civilians? Their children? I donated money to a group that rescued hundreds of children dying of cancer that was finally evacuated. Their story was heart breaking. Do you give a shit about them? Do you give a shit about all the environmental damage that Russia is causing? Do you give a shit about the millions of people world wide who will suffer because Russia won't let Ukraine export their grain? How about the world wide inflation that is affecting the world? Have you been to the store lately?

Right there in your own post you gave the answer to your own question and you don't even know it. You said YOU donated money to a group. Find. I have absolutely no problem with that, and even commend it. But we're not talking about what YOU are doing, we are talking about what you and yours all want the government to do.

When it comes to that, your very emotional argument means nothing. "Don't you care about X? Don't you care about Y" Don't you care about deciding things on merits other than emotion?

It is because everything has been decided on emotion for the last 20 years that we are experiencing food shortages right now. Your "feelings" aren't going to feed the hungry, cold rational action will. And when you say "oh but I meant well", I won't give a damn about that.

Actually you won't say "oh but I meant well" because that would mean admitting that letting your feelings trump reality is wrong, and that feels bad so you won't do that.

You bet I get emotional about it. I have family members (in-laws) in Europe that have a Ukranian family living with them. I've heard the stories. I pretty much agree with President Biden on almost his actions in aiding Ukraine today. A weakened Russia will likely not invade a NATO country. If Nato is attacked, it's WW3. And we're screwed. But bottom line, I believe that sovereign countries should not be invaded. Period. End of story. I would support Ukraine even if Russia weren't threatening NATO. I think that we should arm and resupply Ukraine to the greatest extent possible. Mostly with defensive weapons. But they need longer range weapons to take out Russian artillery in Ukraine. I would understand; but I would not support Ukraine attacking Russia land. I think that the west should do everything possible to encourage Russia to return home. This would include massive sanctions. Bankrupt the fuckers. I think that we also need to figure out a way to get the grain out of Ukraine. The grain needs to be shipped out via Odessa. If we don't figure out a way, millions could starve. At this time, the only way that i see to do this is to send the Russian ships around Odessa to the bottom of the ocean. The Ukrainians could accomplish this hopefully with better longer range anti-ship missiles and better intelligence.

If you know a better way to peace - I'm all ears!

Those who propose "peace" but ante up nothing should be ignored. They want peace but want someone else to lose their freedom of give up something of great value in order to have "peace." That's a false peace, it's surrender, it's a sham. One wonders what's wrong with such people because apparently they don't have anything of value in their lives that they are willing to fight for and defend.

 

[SLD]

Your post makes zero sense. You don't like the Ukrainian Oligarchs. Fine. You don't like those oligarch meanies who now own rubble and ruin. Fine. Do you give a fucking shit about their families? How about all the innocent civilians? Their children? I donated money to a group that rescued hundreds of children dying of cancer that was finally evacuated. Their story was heart breaking. Do you give a shit about them? Do you give a shit about all the environmental damage that Russia is causing? Do you give a shit about the millions of people world wide who will suffer because Russia won't let Ukraine export their grain? How about the world wide inflation that is affecting the world? Have you been to the store lately?

Right there in your own post you gave the answer to your own question and you don't even know it. You said YOU donated money to a group. Find. I have absolutely no problem with that, and even commend it. But we're not talking about what YOU are doing, we are talking about what you and yours all want the government to do.

When it comes to that, your very emotional argument means nothing. "Don't you care about X? Don't you care about Y" Don't you care about deciding things on merits other than emotion?

It is because everything has been decided on emotion for the last 20 years that we are experiencing food shortages right now. Your "feelings" aren't going to feed the hungry, cold rational action will. And when you say "oh but I meant well", I won't give a damn about that.

Actually you won't say "oh but I meant well" because that would mean admitting that letting your feelings trump reality is wrong, and that feels bad so you won't do that.

You bet I get emotional about it. I have family members (in-laws) in Europe that have a Ukranian family living with them. I've heard the stories. I pretty much agree with President Biden on almost his actions in aiding Ukraine today. A weakened Russia will likely not invade a NATO country. If Nato is attacked, it's WW3. And we're screwed. But bottom line, I believe that sovereign countries should not be invaded. Period. End of story. I would support Ukraine even if Russia weren't threatening NATO. I think that we should arm and resupply Ukraine to the greatest extent possible. Mostly with defensive weapons. But they need longer range weapons to take out Russian artillery in Ukraine. I would understand; but I would not support Ukraine attacking Russia land. I think that the west should do everything possible to encourage Russia to return home. This would include massive sanctions. Bankrupt the fuckers. I think that we also need to figure out a way to get the grain out of Ukraine. The grain needs to be shipped out via Odessa. If we don't figure out a way, millions could starve. At this time, the only way that i see to do this is to send the Russian ships around Odessa to the bottom of the ocean. The Ukrainians could accomplish this hopefully with better longer range anti-ship missiles and better intelligence.

If you know a better way to peace - I'm all ears!

Those who propose "peace" but ante up nothing should be ignored. They want peace but want someone else to lose their freedom of give up something of great value in order to have "peace." That's a false peace, it's surrender, it's a sham. One wonders what's wrong with such people because apparently they don't have anything of value in their lives that they are willing to fight for and defend.

Well, if Kissinger is really arguing that, I’d say he’s lost his grip. One thing is certain, and that is change is inevitable. Putin will not be in power indefinitely. Regardless of the outcome of this war, he will eventually be gone. And when that happens there will be a massive shift in the balance of power. The same happened when the old soviet guard died off. The world is waiting with baited breath for that son of a bitch to die.

 

[steve_bank]

In the news last night France and Germany are pushing negotiation with Putin. When pressed a French representative said they just wnat to keep the option open.

I watched a show on Patton last night. Film of the first death camps that were entered were shown. Comparison of the Russians to Nazis while not as extreme is a good one. Utter disregard for life.

Instead of death camps continuous barrages of middles against non combatants. I keep coming around to a brutal element to Russian culture.

Eisenhower in one camp stood up on a Jeep and said to soldiers 'Boys, this is what we are fighting for'.

 

[steve_bank]

You ignore the obvious. Our stability and prosperity is linked to European stability. It is inescapable. Putin and the old Soviets are and were hell bent on disrupting Europe.

Without NATO first Ukraine and then more.

And now the domino theory is back. I did read one rather insane rant talking about how the US needed to help Ukraine because otherwise Putin would have troops march all the way to Spain.

If Putin could he would, that is the point.

He has said publicly for 20 years he waned to restore the Soviet Union, which was built on overt military subjugation.

Go over to Poland, stand on a street corner, and make your argument. You might get a rotten tomato in the face. They remember both the Nazis and the Soviet occupation.

I would be curious to hear where you think your freedom to post freely on this forum without fear comes from.

A very basic quetion. Why do yiu think next week and next year the world around you will be stable?

Invoking the domino thery is silly and ignorant. Look at what Putin has actualy done and tried to due over the last 20 years.

 

[Elixir]

I would be curious to hear where you think your freedom to post freely on this forum without fear comes from.

A lot of libbertards don't really care. They're under the impression that when the US succumbs to dictatorship, they will be treated as a special class, being white and having never defended democracy. They think the wrath of the Trump (or whoever) dictatorship will be directed exclusively at non-whites and the vocal defenders of democracy, or, as Putler calls them, Nazis.
I expect that some of them will be treated as part of the junta. A few of them. The rest will be subjugated just as brutally as the rest of us, even as they are asking "why me, why me?"
In a lot of ways they are the classic guilty enablers who will stand idly by celebrating their superiority and patting themselves on the back for not getting involved in "all that political ugliness", even as the country's democracy crumbles and their own dire fate unfolds.

 

[steve_bank]

Gosh, I guess I am waving the flag.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I found some articles on Noam Chomsky's positions.

Noam Chomsky, Jeremy Scahill on the Russia-Ukraine War - Apr 14

Noam Chomsky: Trump Is The "One Western Statesman" Pushing For Diplomacy To End Ukraine War | Video | RealClearPolitics - May 1

Which is far too generous. The truth about Trump is much closer to what he said nearly six years ago: Noam Chomsky: "Hitler Was A Sincere, Dedicated Ideologue -- Trump Isn't" | Video | RealClearPolitics - 2016 Nov 29

Noam Chomsky Says Ukraine Desire for Heavy Weapons Is 'Western Propaganda' - May 13

NC seems like he is willing to give Vladimir Putin the sort of pass that he does not give to the US foreign-policy establishment.

Noam Chomsky is just another cult leader. Why would anyone outside his cult care about his opinions?

He says things the left likes to hear.

 

[bilby]

I found some articles on Noam Chomsky's positions.

Noam Chomsky, Jeremy Scahill on the Russia-Ukraine War - Apr 14

Noam Chomsky: Trump Is The "One Western Statesman" Pushing For Diplomacy To End Ukraine War | Video | RealClearPolitics - May 1

Which is far too generous. The truth about Trump is much closer to what he said nearly six years ago: Noam Chomsky: "Hitler Was A Sincere, Dedicated Ideologue -- Trump Isn't" | Video | RealClearPolitics - 2016 Nov 29

Noam Chomsky Says Ukraine Desire for Heavy Weapons Is 'Western Propaganda' - May 13

NC seems like he is willing to give Vladimir Putin the sort of pass that he does not give to the US foreign-policy establishment.

Noam Chomsky is just another cult leader. Why would anyone outside his cult care about his opinions?

He says things the left likes to hear.

I am the left. I can assure you, he doesn’t say much that I like to hear, and he says quite a bit that I think is stupid.

Oddly, ‘the left’ isn’t a monolithic entity with entirely homogeneous opinions on all things.

You should strive to remember that fact.

 

[Harry Bosch]

I found some articles on Noam Chomsky's positions.

Noam Chomsky, Jeremy Scahill on the Russia-Ukraine War - Apr 14

Noam Chomsky: Trump Is The "One Western Statesman" Pushing For Diplomacy To End Ukraine War | Video | RealClearPolitics - May 1

Which is far too generous. The truth about Trump is much closer to what he said nearly six years ago: Noam Chomsky: "Hitler Was A Sincere, Dedicated Ideologue -- Trump Isn't" | Video | RealClearPolitics - 2016 Nov 29

Noam Chomsky Says Ukraine Desire for Heavy Weapons Is 'Western Propaganda' - May 13

NC seems like he is willing to give Vladimir Putin the sort of pass that he does not give to the US foreign-policy establishment.

Really odd to see Chompy agreeing with Henry Kissinger!

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

I would be curious to hear where you think your freedom to post freely on this forum without fear comes from.

A lot of libbertards don't really care. They're under the impression that when the US succumbs to dictatorship, they will be treated as a special class, being white and having never defended democracy. They think the wrath of the Trump (or whoever) dictatorship will be directed exclusively at non-whites and the vocal defenders of democracy, or, as Putler calls them, Nazis.
I expect that some of them will be treated as part of the junta. A few of them. The rest will be subjugated just as brutally as the rest of us, even as they are asking "why me, why me?"
In a lot of ways they are the classic guilty enablers who will stand idly by celebrating their superiority and patting themselves on the back for not getting involved in "all that political ugliness", even as the country's democracy crumbles and their own dire fate unfolds.

I must admit, you have a good imagination. That "argument" is simply staggering, and then clinging to a lamp post, and then falling into the gutter and barfing on itself.

 

[bilby]

I would be curious to hear where you think your freedom to post freely on this forum without fear comes from.

A lot of libbertards don't really care. They're under the impression that when the US succumbs to dictatorship, they will be treated as a special class, being white and having never defended democracy. They think the wrath of the Trump (or whoever) dictatorship will be directed exclusively at non-whites and the vocal defenders of democracy, or, as Putler calls them, Nazis.
I expect that some of them will be treated as part of the junta. A few of them. The rest will be subjugated just as brutally as the rest of us, even as they are asking "why me, why me?"
In a lot of ways they are the classic guilty enablers who will stand idly by celebrating their superiority and patting themselves on the back for not getting involved in "all that political ugliness", even as the country's democracy crumbles and their own dire fate unfolds.

I must admit, you have a good imagination. That "argument" is simply staggering, and then clinging to a lamp post, and then falling into the gutter and barfing on itself.

That joke was fairly funny, once.

But it’s noticeable that it’s always standing in place of any actual counter to the arguments being made.

Perhaps you could try explaining why you reject the argument, rather than repeating a now tired and rather childish quip?

Or perhaps you’ve got nothing, and are trying to hide your embarrassment with humour?

 

[Jayjay]

Kissinger isn't entirely wrong. Ukraine will lose territory in this war, and at some point will have to make some painful decisions. In his speech Kissinger said the ideal starting point should be the pre-invasion borders, which means Ukraine would at least have to formally give up on Crimea and the previously occupied DNR/LNR territory, but realistically, Ukraine can't force Russia to withdraw to those borders.

Russia is clearly doing it darnedest to encircle Ukrainian troops in Luhansk, and if they can do that, it means that Ukraine will lose all the heavy weapons in that area, a lot of men, and thousands of civilian lives. If successful, it'll be a major blow to Ukraine. Ukraine is saying it can't do counter-attacks until July, and even with the snail-pace that Russia is advancing, it can probably take also Donetsk by that time.

So how should the west react? I think the main point is that even if Ukraine is losing, the west shouldn't pull the rug underneath it. We should keep providing weapons and maintain sanctions (and add new ones) as long as it takes. Let Ukraine be the ones to call it quits, because they're the ones who are fighting with their lives and for their independence.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Kissinger isn't entirely wrong. Ukraine will lose territory in this war, and at some point will have to make some painful decisions. In his speech Kissinger said the ideal starting point should be the pre-invasion borders, which means Ukraine would at least have to formally give up on Crimea and the previously occupied DNR/LNR territory, but realistically, Ukraine can't force Russia to withdraw to those borders.

Russia is clearly doing it darnedest to encircle Ukrainian troops in Luhansk, and if they can do that, it means that Ukraine will lose all the heavy weapons in that area, a lot of men, and thousands of civilian lives. If successful, it'll be a major blow to Ukraine. Ukraine is saying it can't do counter-attacks until July, and even with the snail-pace that Russia is advancing, it can probably take also Donetsk by that time.

So how should the west react? I think the main point is that even if Ukraine is losing, the west shouldn't pull the rug underneath it. We should keep providing weapons and maintain sanctions (and add new ones) as long as it takes. Let Ukraine be the ones to call it quits, because they're the ones who are fighting with their lives and for their independence.

Even with the amazing successes of the Ukrainian army so far, they're still much smaller and much more worse equipped than Russia. The west have given Ukraine plenty of small weapons. But what Ukraine needs to win is tanks, artillery and aircraft. All absolutely necessary to push Russia back. Russia has about as many regular troops as Ukraine has reserves. The thing with reserve troops is that they're completely untrained. 1 to 1 a regular soldier will win. If Russia starts conscripting soldiers to fight, Ukraine has no chance. If Russia stops making stupid tactical decisions, Ukraine has no chance.

Unless western nations get actively involved and take part in the fighting, over time, Ukraine is fucked. The only scenario where Russia can get out without any territorial gains is one where Putin is removed from power. That seems unlikely.

When the war started an ultra cynical learned friend of mine said that Russia will win, and if we think anything else we are fooling ourselves. He's got a good track record on nailing political developments. Initially I didn't agree with him. But yet again, it looks like he'll get it right.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Kissinger isn't entirely wrong. Ukraine will lose territory in this war, and at some point will have to make some painful decisions. In his speech Kissinger said the ideal starting point should be the pre-invasion borders, which means Ukraine would at least have to formally give up on Crimea and the previously occupied DNR/LNR territory, but realistically, Ukraine can't force Russia to withdraw to those borders.

Russia is clearly doing it darnedest to encircle Ukrainian troops in Luhansk, and if they can do that, it means that Ukraine will lose all the heavy weapons in that area, a lot of men, and thousands of civilian lives. If successful, it'll be a major blow to Ukraine. Ukraine is saying it can't do counter-attacks until July, and even with the snail-pace that Russia is advancing, it can probably take also Donetsk by that time.

So how should the west react? I think the main point is that even if Ukraine is losing, the west shouldn't pull the rug underneath it. We should keep providing weapons and maintain sanctions (and add new ones) as long as it takes. Let Ukraine be the ones to call it quits, because they're the ones who are fighting with their lives and for their independence.

I don't disagree with you. I think that at some point Ukraine needs to find a compromise. It will probably entail Crimea at the least. And it should be decided by Ukraine. But the problem is what will satisfy Russia? They've given land to Russia before. To what end? Russia is totally untrustworthy. And we assume that as soon as Putin dies or is overthrown, that peace will reign. I don't buy it. Many of the Russian "moderates" have fled the country. I think that the remaining Russians want war. They want land. They want to push their "denazi" death cult to other countries. Perhaps its better that Ukraine continues to degrade the putrid Russian military to the point where they won't threaten another country for many years. But they will be back. The West should fully help Ukraine rebuild after the Russians return home.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Of course, Ukraine can cede Crimea to Russia, but they'd expect money for it. With Russia, this isn't about compromise, but taking what they want because it is their birthright.

 

[Tigers!]

Gosh, I guess I am waving the flag.

Don't get tired.

 

[Jayjay]

At this point, thinking about under what terms should Crimea be ceded to Russia, is a bit like wondering what kind of uniforms the Ukrainian army should wear when they march to Moscow. Unrealistic given the current situation on the ground and recent negative developments in particular.

 

[steve_bank]

Crimea is now part of Russia and it will not be given back.

In Putin's military thinking he thinks he needs a land bridge to Crimea and the Russian naval base. You never know when those pesky Lithuanians will mount a naval attack on Russia on the Black Sea.

That being said.

Lithuania wants naval coalition to lift Russia’s blockade of Ukraine’s grain

Britain supports in principle the call for a naval coalition ‘of the willing’ to restart exports through Black Sea

www.theguardian.com

Britain has backed in principle a proposal by Lithuania for a naval coalition “of the willing” to lift the Russian Black Sea blockade on Ukrainian grain exports.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Crimea is now part of Russia and it will not be given back.

In Putin's military thinking he thinks he needs a land bridge to Crimea and the Russian naval base. You never know when those pesky Lithuanians will mount a naval attack on Russia on the Black Sea.

That being said.

Lithuania wants naval coalition to lift Russia’s blockade of Ukraine’s grain

Britain supports in principle the call for a naval coalition ‘of the willing’ to restart exports through Black Sea

www.theguardian.com

Britain has backed in principle a proposal by Lithuania for a naval coalition “of the willing” to lift the Russian Black Sea blockade on Ukrainian grain exports.

That would be very smart. It makes sense to resume grain shipments. NATO can help I'm sure.

 

[SLD]

Kissinger isn't entirely wrong. Ukraine will lose territory in this war, and at some point will have to make some painful decisions. In his speech Kissinger said the ideal starting point should be the pre-invasion borders, which means Ukraine would at least have to formally give up on Crimea and the previously occupied DNR/LNR territory, but realistically, Ukraine can't force Russia to withdraw to those borders.

Russia is clearly doing it darnedest to encircle Ukrainian troops in Luhansk, and if they can do that, it means that Ukraine will lose all the heavy weapons in that area, a lot of men, and thousands of civilian lives. If successful, it'll be a major blow to Ukraine. Ukraine is saying it can't do counter-attacks until July, and even with the snail-pace that Russia is advancing, it can probably take also Donetsk by that time.

So how should the west react? I think the main point is that even if Ukraine is losing, the west shouldn't pull the rug underneath it. We should keep providing weapons and maintain sanctions (and add new ones) as long as it takes. Let Ukraine be the ones to call it quits, because they're the ones who are fighting with their lives and for their independence.

I don't disagree with you. I think that at some point Ukraine needs to find a compromise. It will probably entail Crimea at the least. And it should be decided by Ukraine. But the problem is what will satisfy Russia? They've given land to Russia before. To what end? Russia is totally untrustworthy. And we assume that as soon as Putin dies or is overthrown, that peace will reign. I don't buy it. Many of the Russian "moderates" have fled the country. I think that the remaining Russians want war. They want land. They want to push their "denazi" death cult to other countries. Perhaps its better that Ukraine continues to degrade the putrid Russian military to the point where they won't threaten another country for many years. But they will be back. The West should fully help Ukraine rebuild after the Russians return home.

This is not a war of Russia against Ukraine. This is a war of Putin against Russia. If it were a Russian war, their soldiers would actually be fighting. Their conscripts wouldn’t be deserting or just not even bother reporting for initial training. Senior diplomats wouldn’t be defecting.

This is Putin’s war, and he will lose it. He is already losing it. Napoleon’s dictum is illustrated clearly here: “in war the moral is to the physical as three is to one.” Putin is trying to micromanage this war and he’s doing a crappy job. His contractors are corrupt. His troops aren’t even being fed. They will not fight for him and his stupid war.

The only compromise Ukraine need offer is not to shoot them if they agree to leave peacefully. Otherwise get the fuck out before we blow your brains out.

 

[Jayjay]

Crimea is now part of Russia and it will not be given back.

In Putin's military thinking he thinks he needs a land bridge to Crimea and the Russian naval base. You never know when those pesky Lithuanians will mount a naval attack on Russia on the Black Sea.

That being said.

Lithuania wants naval coalition to lift Russia’s blockade of Ukraine’s grain

Britain supports in principle the call for a naval coalition ‘of the willing’ to restart exports through Black Sea

www.theguardian.com

Britain has backed in principle a proposal by Lithuania for a naval coalition “of the willing” to lift the Russian Black Sea blockade on Ukrainian grain exports.

That would be very smart. It makes sense to resume grain shipments. NATO can help I'm sure.

The grain could be transported by land from Ukraine and put to ships in European ports. The calls to break the blockade are just a ploy to, well, break the blockade. And make it harder for Russia to keep firing missiles from submarines and ships. I can't blame Ukraine for trying to use the threat of famine to try to pull NATO or other forces to the Black Sea to restrict Russian movements, but as an impartial observer I have to call it like I see it.

 

[bilby]

Crimea is now part of Russia and it will not be given back.

In Putin's military thinking he thinks he needs a land bridge to Crimea and the Russian naval base. You never know when those pesky Lithuanians will mount a naval attack on Russia on the Black Sea.

That being said.

Lithuania wants naval coalition to lift Russia’s blockade of Ukraine’s grain

Britain supports in principle the call for a naval coalition ‘of the willing’ to restart exports through Black Sea

www.theguardian.com

Britain has backed in principle a proposal by Lithuania for a naval coalition “of the willing” to lift the Russian Black Sea blockade on Ukrainian grain exports.

That would be very smart. It makes sense to resume grain shipments. NATO can help I'm sure.

The grain could be transported by land from Ukraine and put to ships in European ports. The calls to break the blockade are just a ploy to, well, break the blockade. And make it harder for Russia to keep firing missiles from submarines and ships. I can't blame Ukraine for trying to use the threat of famine to try to pull NATO or other forces to the Black Sea to restrict Russian movements, but as an impartial observer I have to call it like I see it.

Land haulage is a lot more expensive than shipping though. Even railroad haulage is a lot more. Trucks, more still.

There’s a reason why this grain is transported by bulk carrier in normal times, even though you have to cover a lot more distance by sea than by rail or road.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Crimea is now part of Russia and it will not be given back.

In Putin's military thinking he thinks he needs a land bridge to Crimea and the Russian naval base. You never know when those pesky Lithuanians will mount a naval attack on Russia on the Black Sea.

That being said.

Lithuania wants naval coalition to lift Russia’s blockade of Ukraine’s grain

Britain supports in principle the call for a naval coalition ‘of the willing’ to restart exports through Black Sea

www.theguardian.com

Britain has backed in principle a proposal by Lithuania for a naval coalition “of the willing” to lift the Russian Black Sea blockade on Ukrainian grain exports.

That would be very smart. It makes sense to resume grain shipments. NATO can help I'm sure.

The grain could be transported by land from Ukraine and put to ships in European ports. The calls to break the blockade are just a ploy to, well, break the blockade. And make it harder for Russia to keep firing missiles from submarines and ships. I can't blame Ukraine for trying to use the threat of famine to try to pull NATO or other forces to the Black Sea to restrict Russian movements, but as an impartial observer I have to call it like I see it.

Land haulage is a lot more expensive than shipping though. Even railroad haulage is a lot more. Trucks, more still.

There’s a reason why this grain is transported by bulk carrier in normal times, even though you have to cover a lot more distance by sea than by rail or road.

More than three times the cost and take three times longer to ship. Then there is old Soviet (1520mm) to Western Europe (1435mm) track gauge. The safest route from Ukraine (1520) is through Poland (1435) to Lithuania (1520) as Lithuania can best handle the capacity. This entails two transfers of the grain and both ends of the Polish border.
There is a proposal of going through Belarus, thus remaining on Soviet gauge track but all this before old grain rots and new comes in.
Some can go through Romania but this entails a transfer from rail to barge on the Danube.
There simply isn’t the capacity to move efficiently/cost effectively by rail.
All this for grain that goes largely to the Mideast and North Africa who will struggle with the cost.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Western nations led by the U.S. can declare a humanitarian maritime corridor for the grain to pass. If little Russian wants to sink a ship we'll see who blinks first I suppose. It ain't rocket science. They don't own the sea.

 

[Jayjay]

Western nations led by the U.S. can declare a humanitarian maritime corridor for the grain to pass. If little Russian wants to sink a ship we'll see who blinks first I suppose. It ain't rocket science. They don't own the sea.

Aren't the waters near Odesa mined, by Ukraine? And in what condition are the harbors?

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Western nations led by the U.S. can declare a humanitarian maritime corridor for the grain to pass. If little Russian wants to sink a ship we'll see who blinks first I suppose. It ain't rocket science. They don't own the sea.

Aren't the waters near Odesa mined, by Ukraine? And in what condition are the harbors?

These are not impossible challenges to overcome. Shall we let millions starve an let little Hitler have his cake?

 

[Jayjay]

Western nations led by the U.S. can declare a humanitarian maritime corridor for the grain to pass. If little Russian wants to sink a ship we'll see who blinks first I suppose. It ain't rocket science. They don't own the sea.

Aren't the waters near Odesa mined, by Ukraine? And in what condition are the harbors?

These are not impossible challenges to overcome. Shall we let millions starve an let little Hitler have his cake?

Land transport isn't an impossible challenge to overcome either.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Western nations led by the U.S. can declare a humanitarian maritime corridor for the grain to pass. If little Russian wants to sink a ship we'll see who blinks first I suppose. It ain't rocket science. They don't own the sea.

Challenging a naval blockade is risky. This is where the "one mistake" scenario can come to pass. Not that I'm turning dovish but I think if we help out those who need help with the cost this go around and give the Russian ship sinking missiles we're giving Ukraine a chance to do their thing, things should open up from there.