Europe at War

[Todd]

Americans may think it a waste of money to protect the Ukraine.

Polls show most Americans support economic warfare, in a notional way, along with providing military materiel, but very few support direct involvement of American troops.  At one point, about a third supported deploying American forces, which then dropped, and now it is back to about a third.  The fact that this would lead to WWIII should make reasonable people question the value of some poll questions and many poll respondents' knowledge of foreign policy. 

It should also be noted that support has waxed and waned over the past four months, and as with all wars, support will wane more over time.  If the Fed can somehow reduce inflation without causing a recession, then positive support for economic warfare and providing materiel to Ukraine could continue for longer than normal given the pro-war stance of corporate press outlets.  Given the nature of inflation and its causes, reducing inflation will require contractionary monetary policy that will lead to a recession, at which point support for economic warfare and the war more generally will decline much more rapidly among the American public.   

As to references to Trump, that is the latest variant of using Rush Limbaugh or Fox News as a rejoinder.  It means nothing at all.

[Madiel]

Sure you would think differently if we use up our supplies and China attacks Australia.

Sure I wouldn't, because you're never going to "use up your supplies" and if you engaged your brain you would understand that isn't even relevant to what I said. Because my point has to do with the whole "my donation is bigger than yours" dick-swinging contest.

7 billion dollars causes you no pain. Asking whether anyone else has donated more than 7 billion dollars is ignoring what 7 billion dollars would actually mean to another country.

[DavidW]

Sure I wouldn't, because you're never going to "use up your supplies" and if you engaged your brain you would understand that isn't even relevant to what I said. Because my point has to do with the whole "my donation is bigger than yours" dick-swinging contest.

7 billion dollars causes you no pain. Asking whether anyone else has donated more than 7 billion dollars is ignoring what 7 billion dollars would actually mean to another country.

I like how that is the part you object to and not the hilariously stupid hypothetical of China randomly attacking Australia!

[Madiel]

I like how that is the part you object to and not the hilariously stupid hypothetical of China randomly attacking Australia!

Meh. I'm used to hearing about that particular fear in various forms. We're usually worried about economic power rather than military. Our relationship with China is extremely complex.

[71 dB]

We're usually worried about economic power rather than military.

Yes. China does it 21st century style. They "conquer" other countries with money rather than military force.

[LKB]

Yes. China does it 21st century style. They "conquer" other countries with money rather than military force.

But not indefinitely...

While at the time l would have preferred President Biden to have used more finesse and less candor, since the war in Europe I've wondered whether the explicit statement of direct military support for Taiwan wasn't a happy accident.

It may have bought the ROC enough time for Ukraine to play out however it will, and allow the US to start repositioning forces and material to augment the extant resources in the Pacific.

[milk]

Yes. China does it 21st century style. They "conquer" other countries with money rather than military force.

Sri Lanka being one example of this? Who loves China in Asia?

[71 dB]

Thank you Bulgaria and Luxembourg for ratifying Finland's NATO membership! 
🇧🇬🇱🇺

12 countries have ratified, 8 countries are in the process and 10 countries, dominantly South European countries who don't care about security in the North and therefore are not in the hurry and haven't started the process yet. 

[Todd]

Ukrainian forces could wipe out all of 'exhausted' Russian troops' territorial gains, retired US general says

The general is none other than Lt General Ben Hodges.  Only six, maybe twelve, and no more than twenty-four to several hundred months left to go.  No need for settlement talks. 

[LKB]

Indeed, why resist when appeasement has worked so well in the past...

[Todd]

On the internet, everything is always like WWII.

[milk]

I was thinking of making a thread with the question: what would really happen if China invaded Taiwan? Too much politics on GMG? I'm genuinely curious what people think. I really have no idea. I've had someone tell me that China would breeze in and that the U.S. and Japan would stick to the sidelines. Many people say that too much tech business runs through Taiwan to let it go OR to fight over it and let it be destroyed or barred. I don't know much about the Ukraine at all. I've met both HK and Taiwan students. The destruction of freedom in HK is very real to me and painful. And I have (well, had) "friends" on FB who are so far left they're China apologists and considered HK a wing of the CIA (as they do the Dalai Lama). I think Todd brings up a very real question and it's probably an even more difficult one for the Japanese: "What are you willing to do?" "What are you willing to sacrifice?" Japanese are extremely insulated. You might think Americans are, but Americans at least think it's their business (or should be - which maybe indeed be the problem) and know they have something to do with it. Japanese young people don't even know their country is powerful. They have their heads buried in concrete.

[The new erato]

I don't understand the connection between "being lefr" and being China apologists.

The main apologists are those wallowing in cheap Chinese products not giving a damn about Chinese internal politivs or its  International influence.

Both of which I am deeply sceptical of.

[Madiel]

On the internet, everything is always like WWII.

Of all the things that could realistically be like WWII, a war in Europe would have to be pretty damn high up the list.

[Que]

On the internet, everything is always like WWII.

Not long after the invasion, I mentioned the possibility of a Finland scenario: a land-for-peace deal.

But that ship has sailed long time ago. Putin clearly wasn't interested in any negotiations before he had achieved his minimal war goals. Well, he still hasn't achieved those goals but is still convinced he will be able to do so.

In the meantime Russian troops have destroyed anything in their way and have committed terrible atrocities. Putin is not waging war against the Ukrainian army but against Ukraine as an independent nation. That leaves little room for negotiation with the Ukranians - they are fighting for the survival of their country.

[milk]

I don't understand the connection between "being lefr" and being China apologists.

The main apologists are those wallowing in cheap Chinese products not giving a damn about Chinese internal politivs or its  International influence.

Both of which I am deeply sceptical of.

Oh man there's a whole contingent of off-the-charts China apologists. It's not made up and it's no joke.
Here's one of the main dudes. Check him out. He's for real: https://peoplesforum.org/instructor/danny-haiphong/

ETA: the above "activist's" articles: https://www.laprogressive.com/author/danny-haiphong

[71 dB]

Seems like there are three new NATO ratifiers: Thank you Croatia, Latvia and Slovenia! 
🇭🇷🇱🇻🇸🇮

[Que]

Seems like there are three new NATO ratifiers: Thank you Croatia, Latvia and Slovenia! 
🇭🇷🇱🇻🇸🇮

Which countries are still left to ratify?

[Todd]

Not long after the invasion, I mentioned the possibility of a Finland scenario: a land-for-peace deal.

It would mean something if the US President said something similar.  Even if Biden made public statements along similar lines today, it could have an impact on actions of both sides.  Neither the US nor the Russians have any interest in doing so.  The US is continuing the reckless expansion of NATO, for instance. 

I was thinking of making a thread with the question: what would really happen if China invaded Taiwan?

It is a possible war.  Given unconstrained US militarism and imperialism under false names, there is a too high probability that the US could enter into a war.  The US has material economic interests in Taiwan, unlike Ukraine, which offers neither economic nor strategic benefit to the US.  And as Douglas MacArthur famously said, Taiwan is an "unsinkable aircraft carrier", so it offers long-standing potential military advantage.  (MacArthur was bloodthirsty, racist, and vainglorious, and Truman canned him, so remember that, too.)

Fortunately, Oregon Senator Ron Wyden is pushing hard for the Senate to pass the CHIPS for America Act, a $52 billion return to industrial policy and old-fashioned mercantilism to help address one of the critical economic interests.  Now, Intel is a massive presence in Oregon and is the largest private employer in the state, so of course Wyden is pushing for it, but he is right to do so on national grounds as well.  Trump was not unique, and certain aspects of Trumpism are now bipartisan and growing in popularity.  If the US can achieve a material degree of autarky in some key defense related industries, it can walk away from Taiwan.  Zero Americans should die for the ghost of Chiang Kai-shek.

[Madiel]

Which countries are still left to ratify?

The official list has 14 out of 30 countries that have ratified. So quite a few left. I worked out it's:

Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Turkiye, United States.