Adam
702
People here like Fox News so I’ll use this one:
Seems like so far Biden is not going along with saying Ukraine can’t be in NATO. This article doesn’t have good specifics about other things mentioned, but other articles have talked about other possible exchanges:
We set up a system where Russia can verify that our anti ballistic missile sites in Poland and Romania can’t have offensive weapons. Putin has referenced how Tomohawks can easily replace the normal anti ballistic and anti air missiles. That seems like an opening for discussion with us needing assurance on Russian bases only being defensive. Not sure how that would work, but interesting Russian request I hadn’t thought of.
And a bunch of missile limit rules. That gets more complicated. I’m actually feeling pretty good with our response if these documents are correct. NATO doesn’t let another country dictate who we can admit, and Russia needs to deescalate for any kind of negotiations. With a carrot on things that might make Russia feel more secure. But we’ll see.
Curious on other’s thoughts.
Edit. Sorry, I somehow replied to the original post. That was an accident.
Adam
703
This is the news outfit that got the documents. Assuming they are accurate though it kinda seems like the State Department has accepted their authenticity. It has much more specific information. Reading through it all I do think we gave a good response to Putin’s crazy demands.
and when he threatens georgia next month?
not saying disarmament in the theatre is a bad thing, but if this becomes the template for how russia gets what it wants…
Adam
705
We deal with that particular situation when it happens. And we do what we can do avoid it. A whole different situation that I would love to talk about here on a policy level. Without ignorant talking points(not referring to you). There is a major difference in terms of Russian policy with Georgia in that Georgia does not threaten them. They have Georgia contained. A Western/NATO Georgia is an annoyance to Russia. Their policies are still to make sure it never happens, but not to the level of Ukraine. A Western/NATO Ukraine is a direct threat. It’s not quite apples to oranges comparison, it’s orchard of apples to a bushel of apples comparison. But I would love to talk Russia/Georgia/USA politics. I’ve been following news and press releases on Georgia/Russia daily since 2008 and have tried to learn as much as possible.
It’s one of those things that I don’t think people fully understand here. When Yanukovych was thrown out of office in 2014, it fundamentally destroyed Russia’s strategic defense. If you’re anti Russia/pro NATO-EU it was one of the greatest victories of the last twenty years. That’s why Russia had no choice but to illegally seize Crimea. And people here will talk about how Obama “gave Putin Crimea”, disregarding the actual impossibility of stopping that from happening. And it was still an amazing victory for lack of a better term, The West. I’ve been watching that since day one also.
But I really would like an honest dialogue about politics and strategy when it comes to Ukraine or Georgia. I would like to avoid “Obama gave Putin Crimea” and “Obama gave them blankets!” “Biden is Chamberlain!” Stuff like that. That is just stupid and uninformed and is best left for cartoons.
Adam
706
Hey Ne_Natuf! I kind addressed your point, but not specifically for Georgia. I think we keep doing for Georgia what we’ve been doing.
-
Keep training their light infantry battalions and loading them up with Javelins. Their government just announced two days ago that they were paying for another batch of them that was approved by the US State Department back in August(there’s always a lag between State Department approval and the receiving nation paying for/receiving them). And move into training them at the Mechanized/armor school.
-
Up the US assistance to Georgia like we did for Ukraine(I have a breakdown of what we give in military assistance to Georgia, and once you take out the NATO funding for the JTEC site and some other training initiatives, Georgia only gets about $40 million in FMS funds to buy arms. That’s not enough. So up that ■■■■■■ I’d give Georgia at least $100 million for procurement of arms. Their budget is already spending 20% on procurement, but their budget for actual military spending is maybe $350 million a year. So get them things they need that don’t require a lot of follow up costs. As an example, don’t try and get them F-16s or Apaches. They can’t afford the follow up costs. And send them anything they want with no red tape in terms of Excess Defense Articles like we’re doing with Ukraine. I would love to send them Improved HAWK batteries. We’ve sent a bunch of those out to other allies. That leads to my next point.
-
Get Georgia air defense capabilities. The US has given them almost nothing. France has sold them radars and Mistrals and some intentionally vague other air defense systems, but that’s it from NATO. Israel agreed to refurbish their previously bought Spyder system and agreed to sell them another specifically vague system…but that’s nothing. They need a network covering Tbilisi, Gori, and Poti at least. Improved HAWKs aren’t that great, but Georgia has almost nothing.
-
US has to stand firm with the rest of the world that Georgia is presently being occupied, and that Russia is regularly violating agreements by “borderization” in South Ossetia. There is one Georgia and no peace will come while South Ossetia and Abkhazia are occupied by Russian forces. That has to be our message.
Those are my thoughts now. But I’d love to talk about it. Thanks!
Gonna be cold and dark now that the saber rattling is paying off.
1 Like
They have a fun nationalist tinge to them.
The Church views the world as comprised of civilizations defined along religious lines, except for secular Western civilization, explained Verkhovsky. Russia is thus the core of Orthodox civilization. Since Orthodox Christians form the majority of Russian society, the Russian Orthodox Church considers itself entitled to define what this “Orthodox people” needs. He suggested that, in the Church’s view, the people should return to their traditions of Orthodox civilization and gradually reject Western and secular borrowings.
https://carnegieendowment.org/2011/01/27/nationalism-among-russian-orthodox-church-s-leaders-during-first-decade-of-twenty-first-century-event-3201
1 Like
This is the most boring war between nuclear armed powers ever.
Draft someone already.
1 Like
i don’t disagree with any of that, for either georgia or ukraine. i don’t disagree with sanctions. i don’t disagree with talks between nato and russia about placement of offensive weapon systems all by itself connected to nothing else. we however should not be out front on the issue of russian troops building up on the border. let the eu take the lead (not even nato). if we want to send more troops or systems to nato members, no matter who, its none of russia’s business outside of disarmament talks that should have absolutely no connection to any non nato country. both georgia and ukraine are on the “list” to join nato, which nato rules do not allow as long as they’re in an existing conflict. this gives russia a damned good reason to cause conflict with them. at this point, we should be encouraging ukraine and georgia (quietly) to form their own alliance. they should, acting in concert with each other, ratchet up there own pressure on russian forces within their borders. make russia fight a war on two fronts. only when the cost outweigh the benefit will russia allow either conflict to end. they must be made to see that if ukraine and georgia were to join nato, its more of a guarantee they wouldn’t be attacked than a threat if they were,
He’ll do whatever he’s told to do… for the purchase of some Hunter art, or other Biden Inc. Investment.
2 Likes
Let’s say that’s true and Biden Inc is the primary goal. Does it matter that it is?
1 Like
Care to tell me where I called FDR a clone of Neville Chamberlain?
How about JFK?
Your boy Joey Biden is not even in their league.
NATO has been very clear that they will not get into a shooting war with Russia unless Russia attack them first.
Appeasement.
Yes he was.
180 degrees from Winston Churchill.
But Biden is none of the above. Chamberlain and Churchill were mentally competent and had reasons for their positions… right or wrong. Biden doesn’t even know if he’s president or not. His only reason for doing anything at is because " they told me to…"
If you want to defend the progressive liberal ideology … that’s a choice that misguided but rational people could make. But defending Biden? Nobody but mindless drones would do that.
1 Like
How about “Obama (via Nuland) gave Russia a reason to go into Ukraine. Through Nuland’s call, it was made public that the US was trying to control Ukraine.”
Is that a cartoon too?
2 Likes
Appeasement not pacifism.
By the way chamberlain was an appeaser for a reason. His one action is taken as if her were an appeaser his entire career. He wasn’t. He rearmed the British forces and didn’t believe that Britain was ready for war in 38. It wasn’t by the way. As its near destruction in the beginning of the war demonstrated he was partially right.
So no he wasn’t what his name is used to describe.
Obama was partially responsible for Maidan there is no two ways about it.
“By the way” … as though that is an unknown little tidbit of history. 
You don’t know how many times I’ve read that rewritten history… or at least it is reinterpreted by liberals who simply despised Churchill.
Chamberlain didn’t go into the “peace in our time” spiel and wave the agreement signed by Herr Hitler thinking that war was inevitable. He thought his appeasement would be all that Hitler wanted. He was a fool.
I do not despise Churchill. He was a much better leader and would have re armed England much earlier. Stop assuming. Please
Yeah peace in our time is a speech. Something about actions being louder than words
Lie down with dogs; wake with fleas.
