Europe at War

[Todd]

Orbán has used his "special relationship" with the Kremlin to Hungary's advantage:

Russia's share of India's June oil imports surges to record

I don't know if Modi has a "special relationship" with Putin, but India has been buying a lot more oil from Russia.  It is perfectly rational for countries to buy critical resources at a lower price when possible.  It is very, very hard for many Europeans and Americans to accept that most of the world does not view the Russo-Ukrainian War as anything more than a regional, European mess and that sanctions are not viewed as righteous or even legitimate.

He says there's a 70% chance Russia wins, and he's not gleeful about it. Anyway, I'm very curious what those here who think the war is a good idea might say in response to it.
https://youtu.be/t5HDD6e7mn4//

There are a lot of YouTube content creators of varying degrees of reliability.  Of course, if one disagrees with a YouTuber, one can dismiss said content creator out of hand.  That's how things work.

[Todd]

*eta: echos of Todd: (20:02) "...the Unites States doesn't really have any economic vested interest in the Ukraine..."

Not too terribly long ago, the Forty-Fourth President of the United States of America rather famously said that he did not see Ukraine as a core interest for the United States.  He certainly did not couch his perceptions of US interests in anything so crude as economic interests.  How gauche.

The Obama Doctrine

Obama's theory here is simple: Ukraine is a core Russian interest but not an American one, so Russia will always be able to maintain escalatory dominance there.

"The fact is that Ukraine, which is a non-nato country, is going to be vulnerable to military domination by Russia no matter what we do," he said.

I asked Obama whether his position on Ukraine was realistic or fatalistic.

"It's realistic," he said. "But this is an example of where we have to be very clear about what our core interests are and what we are willing to go to war for. And at the end of the day, there's always going to be some ambiguity."

[drogulus]

     Over at Grim Reapers I hoped to see what Kortana thought about the Uke attacks on SAM sites. She's the expert "SAMstress" over there, as she is involved in the DCS designs used for their missions.

     She's in a submarine atm, doing Wolfpack missions. I wish she'd surface and help us out.

[drogulus]

     On another front, Taiwan has HIMARS. They also got great insights into the Chinese strategy and capability from the Pelosi tantrum. It's all good.

[milk]

Russia's share of India's June oil imports surges to record

I don't know if Modi has a "special relationship" with Putin, but India has been buying a lot more oil from Russia.  It is perfectly rational for countries to buy critical resources at a lower price when possible.  It is very, very hard for many Europeans and Americans to accept that most of the world does not view the Russo-Ukrainian War as anything more than a regional, European mess and that sanctions are not viewed as righteous or even legitimate.


There are a lot of YouTube content creators of varying degrees of reliability.  Of course, if one disagrees with a YouTuber, one can dismiss said content creator out of hand.  That's how things work.

Some of the details are interesting anyway. It's worth a watch.

[drogulus]

Some of the details are interesting anyway. It's worth a watch.

     India will buy oil at a reduced price. I find it easy to accept that nations outside Europe might take advantage of the plight of Russia.

     How regional is the oil crisis, or food crisis? It looks like it's a crisis for attacking the Ukrainian defense against Russian attack, but it's not a crisis that should concern the US and its allies, depending on something. What something? Who knows?

     The world food crisis is regional, or world, or not real, which is option 3 I guess.

[Florestan]

It is also worth noting when talking about "civil wars" in other parts of the world besides Europe that we are often talking about borders that were imposed by Europeans with absolutely no regard to local history.

Yes, absolutely. No argument from me in this respect. The European colonial powers bear a heavy responsibility for the current Middle Eastern and African mess.

[Florestan]

Ukraine should be striking Russian military assets within Russian borders, wherever possible.

I'm not that sure. Actually, I think they shouldn't, except Crimea.

[LKB]

I'm not that sure. Actually, I think they shouldn't, except Crimea.

Putin is already trying to destroy Ukraine. Unless Zelenskyy has been told that western support will stop if he strikes such targets, he has little to lose.

[Florestan]

I've just returned from a 4-day trip to Sibiu and Brașov. Lots of Ukrainian in those cities, elegantly dressed and hair-dressed, especially the ladies (make-up also), they strolled at the Zoo or in the city center, ate icecream and drank beer, chatted and laughed and did not seem particularly upset by, let alone concerned for, the fate of their country. I suspect those people were not among the hundreds of thousands who queued up at the border passes, luggage in hand and often no papers for their kids, waiting for hours to get into Romania.

Make of this what you will, I just reported the fact.

[Florestan]

Putin is already trying to destroy Ukraine. Unless Zelenskyy has been told that western support will stop if he strikes such targets, he has little to lose.

He might have little to lose but the world at large has a lot. Encouraging Ukraine to shift from defensive actions to aggressive ones is sheer lunacy.

[Todd]

He might have little to lose but the world at large has a lot. Encouraging Ukraine to shift from defensive actions to aggressive ones is sheer lunacy.

We want to see Russia weakened to the degree that it can't do the kinds of things that it has done in invading Ukraine.

It is hard to see publicly stated US war objectives being achieved by use of defensive tactics only.

[Florestan]

It is hard to see publicly stated US war objectives being achieved by use of defensive tactics only.

Well, Russian domestic consumption propaganda is very aggressive. I suspect American domestic consumption propaganda to be the same. Sabre-rattling competition.

[drogulus]

He might have little to lose but the world at large has a lot. Encouraging Ukraine to shift from defensive actions to aggressive ones is sheer lunacy.

     The US objects to the use of long range weapons they provide to attack Russia, and some weapons have been denied to Ukraine because the US doesn't want US fingerprints on their use to attack Russian territory. Other than that, any counterattack into Russian territory is a matter of risks/rewards for Ukraine to decide. By all means the US has influence, up to a point. It can deny even defensive weapons to Ukraine to force their hand. That is very unlikely IMV.

[Todd]

Well, Russian domestic consumption propaganda is very aggressive. I suspect American domestic consumption propaganda to be the same. Sabre-rattling competition.

The publicly stated objectives align with the long history of aggressive American action, including, but not limited to, recklessly expanding NATO.  Further weakening Russia is very clearly an actual US objective.

[Florestan]

The publicly stated objectives align with the long history of aggressive American action, including, but not limited to, recklessly expanding NATO.  Further weakening Russia is very clearly an actual US objective.

Susbstitute Russia for the US and it's the same old story: two great powers trying to undermine and weaken each other.

You speak as if Russia were an innocent victim and the Eastern European countries such as Poland, the Baltic States or Romania were coerced by the US into joining NATO. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

[Todd]

You speak as if Russia were an innocent victim and the Eastern European countries such as Poland, the Baltic States or Romania were coerced by the US into joining NATO. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

I have never represented Russia as an innocent victim.  You actively misrepresent what I have written.

[Florestan]

I have never represented Russia as an innocent victim.  You actively misrepresent what I have written.

I apologize if I did, but given that you rarely clarify what you mean when asked to, I might perhaps be excused.

[Todd]

I apologize if I did, but given that you rarely clarify what you mean when asked to, I might perhaps be excused.

This seems rather disingenuous.

[drogulus]

     Collective defense will be seen by an aggressor as aggressive for the purpose of undermining it, natch. The other reason to view defense as aggressive is....ah.....

     Maybe some day we'll uncover the secret NATO plan to invade Russia. I wonder about this, though. My reasons are rational, as I disparage emotive claims.

     NATO arms are far too limited for aggressive action. They are barely adequate for defense, a problem evident to US critics of NATO members for not contributing enough even for purely defensive purposes.

     There, it's done. Eat or have cake. Which is it, weak defense or aggressive action in service of the secret plan?