Europe at War

[Todd]

Far be it from YOU to tell the Ukrainians how to see the war.

That is the job of the United States Secretary of Defense. 

[Que]

The center of gravity of European defense has moved east [....]

   

Interesting map!! With pre WW II borders...

[Madiel]

Far be it from YOU to tell the Ukrainians how to see the war.

He's been doing it all year. It is highly insulting to Ukrainians and people of Ukrainian background, who have been struggling against forms of Russian control for GENERATIONS.

[BasilValentine]

From the Gray Lady (an ultra-wealthy family's plaything) via Yahoo: Spat Over Patriot Missiles Reveals Deepening Rifts in Europe Over Ukraine

Some Eastern European "allies" are reckless in the extreme, and their bellicosity risks needless and deadly escalation of the war.  I'm unambiguously Team Germany in the Germany-Poland spat. 


From the LA Times (a billionaire's plaything): U.S. policy makes Ukraine fight by rules Russia doesn't follow

Ukrainians must understand that this is America's proxy war.  Ukrainian interests really are secondary.  As Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin has said publicly, US policy is to weaken Russia, but to quote Joseph Robinette Biden Jr from this article, "We're trying to avoid World War III."  Zelensky should take his Puppet of the Year award, be happy, and follow orders. 

Hopefully the people who matter will decide to negotiate soon.

Taking the above as written, why would the US want to see negotiations? Ukraine is willing to keep fighting, seemingly without unduly "imminentizing the eschaton," Russia continues to be weakened, the US is selling more natural gas and gathering interesting data on its weapons systems and the capabilities of its adversary, and Zelensky has risen from low-rent comedian to Times person of the year. What's the downside from your perspective again?

[Todd]

Interesting map!! With pre WW II borders...

Donald Rumsfeld's New Europe ascendant.

Everyone in the world loves George W Bush.

Zelensky has risen from low-rent comedian to Times person of the year.

[drogulus]

Interesting map!! With pre WW II borders...

    The idea dates from long before WWII and NATO.

     From the Wiki:

The proposed federation was meant to emulate the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, stretching from the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea, that, from the end of the 16th century to the end of the 18th, had united the Kingdom of Poland and the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Intermarium complemented Piłsudski's other geopolitical vision, Prometheism, whose goal was the dismemberment of the Russian Empire and that Empire's divestment of its territorial acquisitions.

Intermarium was perceived by some Lithuanians as a threat to their newly established independence, and by some Ukrainians as a threat to their aspirations for independence, and while France backed the proposal, it was opposed by the Soviet Union and by most other Western powers. Within two decades of the failure of Piłsudski's grand scheme, all the countries that he had viewed as candidates for membership in the Intermarium federation had fallen to the Soviet Union or to Nazi Germany, except for Finland (which suffered some territorial losses in the 1939–40 Winter War with the Soviet Union).

    I think I get it. It's not so good to be squozed between great powers and be invaded every time there's a world war and even maybe when there's not. How about we form our own gang, kind of like a NATO only with balls?

[Madiel]

One should not misunderstand what Time person of the year actually means. As can be read from when Putin won...

https://web.archive.org/web/20080911042817/http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/personoftheyear/article/0,28804,1690753_1690757_1696150,00.html

[Florestan]

I think I get it. It's not so good to be squozed between great powers and be invaded every time there's a world war and even maybe when there's not. How about we form our own gang, kind of like a NATO only with balls?

I don't get it all. Do you suggest that Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, the Baltics, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Slovenia and Montenegro (all the green countries on your map that are currently NATO members, minus Serbia and Macedonia which are not) should leave NATO and form their own military alliance, with an aggressive stance against Russia? If yes, then it's sheer insanity. If no, then what do you suggest, actually?

[drogulus]

   

I don't get it all. Do you suggest that Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, the Baltics, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Slovenia and Montenegro (all the green countries on your map that are currently NATO members, minus Serbia and Macedonia which are not) should leave NATO and form their own military alliance, with an aggressive stance against Russia? If yes, then it's sheer insanity. If no, then what do you suggest, actually?

     They don't have to leave NATO. They don't have to invade Russia, or even threaten to do it. Russia would be on notice that Intermarium states will come to each others aid no matter what the French and Germans decide, or what Hungary vetoes. As for the US, it's already moving east.

     

   

[BasilValentine]

One should not misunderstand what Time person of the year actually means. As can be read from when Putin won...

https://web.archive.org/web/20080911042817/http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/personoftheyear/article/0,28804,1690753_1690757_1696150,00.html

If one can tear ones eyes away from the shiny objects for a moment, my point was: Given that Todd had just focused on several major US foreign policy objectives being advanced by current policy — the very reasons "the people who matter" choose not to negotiate — I was wondering why he thought that was the place to restate his hope that they would negotiate.

[Todd]

I was wondering why he thought that was the place to restate his hope that they would negotiate.

Negotiations good. 

War bad.

Hope that helps.

[LKB]

Negotiations good. 

War bad.

Hope that helps.

Brilliant.

[SimonNZ]

Negotiations good. 

War bad.

Hope that helps.

Doesn't "fuck off out of our country and we'll stop kicking your demoralized and unmotivated army's ass" count as negotiation?

[Que]

The treacherous, corrupt and anti-democratic government of Hungary has been bribed into cooperation:


EU breaks Hungary stalemate to approve €18bn aid plan

European Union governments on Monday struck a deal with Hungary that sorts out financial aid for Ukraine in 2023 and gains Budapest's approval for a global minimum corporate tax, all in exchange for EU flexibility about funds paid to Hungary.

The complex deal came after months of wrangling between EU institutions, member countries and Hungary and was spelled out on Monday by the council that represents EU member governments and by diplomats speaking anonymously. It means Ukraine will get €18bn from the EU budget next year.

Budapest had been vetoing making payments by that stable, predictable and cheaper means, rather than by the bilateral loans that member countries have been extending to Kyiv.

[Que]

Negotiations good. 

War bad.

Hope that helps.

Disingenuous on both accounts.

Firstly you know very well the difference between negotiations and unconditional surrender and capitulation designed to dismember a country and subjugate a nation.

Secondly I have never noticed that you ever had an issue with war as such. On the contrary, war is an integral part of your view on geopolitics.

[Florestan]

The treacherous, corrupt and anti-democratic government of Hungary has been bribed into cooperation:

As an aside: I don't know how treacherous, corrupt and anti-democratic the Austrian government is but maybe they too can be bribed into stop making false claims, and blatantly lying, about Romania and into not blocking anymore a well-deserved Schengen accession.  And I'm sorry to say that your own government, acted rather hypocritically and duplicitously.  As the Polish Foreign Affairs Minister put it, it's simply inacceptable that two EU member states be humiliated for 11 years. Just saying. 

[Florestan]

Zelensky suggests to Biden that global peace summit be convened

[Que]

As an aside: I don't know how treacherous, corrupt and anti-democratic the Austrian government is but maybe they too can be bribed into stop making false claims, and blatantly lying, about Romania and into not blocking anymore a well-deserved Schengen accession.  And I'm sorry to say that your own government, acted rather hypocritically and duplicitously.  As the Polish Foreign Affairs Minister put it, it's simply inacceptable that two EU member states be humiliated for 11 years. Just saying. 

I'm aware of these tensions. Like with all things, with free movement of people, with the good will also come the bad. I think Romania has a bit of an  image problem there. I personally don't think in reality there is not a bigger problem than in many other countries, but general public and political opinion leans in another direction.

Orban's tacit support of Putin has alienated Hungary from the other members of the Visegrad group, and notably Poland. And it turned Ukraine into an enemy for many years to come. At some point Hungary's chickens will come home to roost...

[Florestan]

think Romania has a bit of an  image problem there. I personally don't think in reality there is not a bigger problem than in many other countries, but general public and political opinion leans in another direction.

That's true but I should have thought that a responsible government acts guided not by narrow electoral concerns or mere biased hearsay but by general principles and verifiable facts. Unfortunately, it was not the case and all the talks about European solidarity proved false and hypocritical. The Austrian veto and The Netherlands's duplicitous stance (which created a lose-lose situation) actually blew the wind in the sails of nationalists and eurosceptics, who have been rather dormant lately but now vociferosuly and actively call for a boycot of Austrian products, gas stations and banks and foment a heated anti-Austrian sentiment. I'm afraid that, because of narrow and mean electoral interests, the until now excellent relationship between Romania and Austria has been gravely and, at least in the short term, irreparably damaged, including at diplomatic level. Does this serves the interests of Austria or the EU? Hell, no. It only serves the interests of those who relish a weak and divided EU --- and we all know who they are.

[Todd]

Disingenuous on both accounts.

Incorrect across the board.

First, unconditional surrender is a rare outcome of any war, and as a matter of policy the most prominent global example is WWII, which again provides nothing but a false analogy.  Countries and other political entities have lost territory as part of war for millennia.  It is the way of the world.  It is part of the best potential outcome in the Russo-Ukrainian War. 

Second, war is bad.  That anyone should have to repeat that or defend that notion demonstrates how people can rationalize anything.  I do openly acknowledge that war is an intrinsic part of the international system, always has been, and always will be.  I merely seek to eliminate US involvement in wars that do not threaten US security or interests.  The Russo-Ukrainian War does not threaten either.  It is a very bad thing that many thousands have died and many thousands more may very well die, but from an American perspective, it does not matter.  We should not be involved.  The same goes for all other current wars around the globe - even the ones the US had a hand in starting or prolonging.  To aid in the decrease of US involvement in wars around the world, the US should reduce its global military presence, starting with Europe; decrease the size of its military; decrease the military/paramilitary budgets of its intelligence agencies; cut back on and hopefully eliminate arms sales (another area where the USA is #1); eliminate the sharing of technologies with all but a tiny number of allies (ie, the English speaking ones); and withdraw from any international organizations that attempt to adjudicate or manage global conflicts.  At the very the least, the US should not fund such institutions.  With the exceptions of WWII and 9/11, the US has engaged only in wars of choice since 1865, and even those ultimately could have been avoided, the disastrous war in Afghanistan, especially.  (It is telling that the DOD falsely describes the latter as a "necessary war of self-defense".)  People around the world really ought not to go around slaughtering each other, but they will.  So what?  The US need not be involved every time, if at all.