Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[iam416]

I don't know what a good deal for Ukraine looks like. I don't know what Zelensky views as acceptable. They have the Russian army occupying some of their land and no real way to eject them other than, I guess, time. What's the off ramp for Ukraine? Beating an army they can't beat? What's the off ramp for Russia?

I dunno. I do know that Jimmy Carter, with the aid of a fawning press, rehabilitated his disastrous career by getting people to stop fighting. And people didn't much care if they were good or bad deals (his North Korea shenanigans were borderline treason) -- it was all about the "Peace" and playing John Lennon's dumbfuck illiterate song.

So, DSL -- what's a good deal look like for Ukraine?

[Dr. Strangelove]

I would like to see Russia make some concession of some kind but we'll have to wait and see! Everything Trump said yesterday was "Ukraine gives up this, Ukraine gives up that". And then he blamed them for starting the war in the first place.

Right now the peace plan kind of sounds like

1) Russia keeps all land it stole. And possibly Ukraine has to give up any unconquered land in any province Russia does not 100% control.

2) Ukraine signs a "deal" giving the US 50% of all its mineral rights

3) Ukraine disbands its armed forces and signs a neutrality act. Ukraine signs a treaty promising to never join NATO and never join the EU.

4) The US removes all its troops from the Baltics and maybe even Poland.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Oh I forgot 5) Putin promises peace in our times

[Dr. Strangelove]

[THE_WIZARD_]

I mean...much like the Buckeyes cannot beat M...nor can Ukraine defeat the Red Army. Both need to just get what they can...in Ukraine's case...lives...in the Buckeyes case...well...their manhood...and a tainted natty...

[Dr. Strangelove]

This is long but a really good takedown of the Birthright Citizenship executive order. Specifically the "allegiance-obedience" theory. Some very interesting quotes from Reconstruction Era debates in Congress.

President Trump's Executive Order on Birthright Citizenship is Unconstitutional

[Dr. Strangelove]

I mean...much like the Buckeyes cannot beat M...nor can Ukraine defeat the Red Army. Both need to just get what they can...in Ukraine's case...lives...in the Buckeyes case...well...their manhood...and a tainted natty...

We probably should've pushed for a settlement in the first half of 2022, right after Russia's invasion floundered horribly. That was the time of maximum leverage.

[iam416]

I'm not entirely clear on what "some concessions" mean. Like, if they pull back from, say, 50% of the territory they've captured? (not including Crimea -- that shit's been gone).

[Dr. Strangelove]

I'm not entirely clear on what "some concessions" mean. Like, if they pull back from, say, 50% of the territory they've captured? (not including Crimea -- that shit's been gone).

I think it seems like low-hanging fruit to request the return of the thousands of children Russia kidnapped. If they aren't even going to push for that...

[Dr. Strangelove]

[Dr. Strangelove]

[Dr. Strangelove]

Trump throws Thune, Graham, and the Senate GOP under the bus to endorse the House budget plan. The House plan will be significantly harder to get passed and will almost certainly require lots of Dem votes.

‘Did Not See That One Coming’: Trump Endorses House GOP’s Reconciliation Plan After a Standoff - NOTUS (Allbritton Journalism Institute)

[Jeff Buchanan]

Ukraine: This post is all big picture (IMO) stuff. Much of the available analysis from western/allied sources loses context which should include a historical perspective and global realpolitik. Trump thinks he can cajole Putin into backing away from his expansionist, imperial ideology. That's not likely to happen. But he can win some breakthroughs in any negotiations, with the backdrop of ending the war in Ukraine, by restoring and improving high level relationships with Russia. Ukraine, in that scenario, becomes an unimportant bystander. Let me explain.

Trump does have some leverage/bargaining chips with Putin to get something valuable in return (removing US sanctions, freeing sovereign wealth that has been impounded, ordering a reduction in force of US military units within the U.S. European Command (USEUCOM), modifying or eliminating US participation in NATO). Deals could be reached between the US and Russia that involve guarantees from Putin that he will not undertake the kind of monkey business he has undertaken in Ukraine and Moldova in Europe, especially those states that were once part of the Soviet Union. Putin's monkey business involves, for example, claiming control of Separatist regions of Ukraine and Moldova using Russian soldiers in black uniforms to enforce the installation of Russian political figures in key governing positions in the Donbas and contiguous regions of Moldova that border Russia. Declaring annexation of parts of Moldova, the states of Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia inside Ukraine to become Russian states. Putin has to be prevented from doing that in eastern Europe.

I think it was DSL that quoted Neville Chamberlain implying that Trump is wrongly looking like he'll give up defending Europe, including Ukraine and especially the Eastern/Russian border states, against Russian expansionism claiming "Peace in Our Time". Putin might then be encouraged to engage in the incremental encroachment into former Soviet states using military and unconventional force. That would be much like Germany's military and political incursion into Sudanten Land, so the Chamberlain analogy works. Trump appears like he might look the other way while Putin formalizes (gains international acceptance of new borders for Ukraine/Russia) of what he's managed to grab since 2014, but not beyond that.

Let's say Trump agrees to look the other way. What does the US get in return? The big prize is nuclear arms control deals with Russia and, through Russia, with China and Iran. SALT (Strategic Arms Limitations Treaty) was left to expire a year ago. Trump has been saying since then he wants to restore a nuclear arms control treaty involving all nuclear powers. Achieving that, starting with Russia and China and with Iran tagging along, would be a biggly deal.

TBF, and it was Hannibal that made this point 3 years ago, Ukraine is geopolitically unimportant. The US should not be involved in arming it to resist Russian goals for that piece of land. Let Russia have what they want there. There are actually legitimate reasons for doing that. Of course, the counter argument to that, still valid IMO, is that Putin won't stop in Ukraine threatening European security with his expansionist, imperial designs. So, the end game in negotiations today has to be Putin backing away from expansionism into Europe. That has to be backed up by collective European security guarantees. Security guarantees are not about promising NATO will provide that. I think Trump will engineer a US withdrawal from that treaty which he sees as an anachronism. He'll argue, appropriately IMO considering realpolitik ,Europe has to defend itself, presenting the means to deter Putin from undertaking more land grabs by any means, without US involvement. In the big picture, I think this position is defensible.

[Dr. Strangelove]

[Dr. Strangelove]

Trump and a lot of the people he surrounds himself with are obsessed by the idea that we can somehow get Putin/Russia to turn against China. A reverse of "Nixon Goes to China" in the 70's. It's not going to happen short of China invading eastern Siberia like in Tom Clancy's 25-year-old novel.

It doesn't even make sense from an economic standpoint to align with Russia. Their economy is smaller than Canada or Italy. In a decade South Korea will probably surpass them. Canada has basically the same natural resources Russia has and for some dumb fucking reason we've decided to have a trade war with them.