Europe at War

[Todd]

Life is opinion --- meaning that my opinion is as good as yours or Bernard the Bear's. Fine with me.

People would rather believe than know --- meaning that you would rather believe than know. Fine with me as well.

Propaganda death ensemble --- you'd have to explain it to me, my English is not good enough to make head or tail of it.

Pretty good.

[Madiel]

An interesting article about life in Russia right now. And how little impact the war and sanctions are having for most people.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-01-15/life-on-russias-home-front-after-ten-months-of-war-in-ukraine/101852210

[milk]

Serious people might want to explore the results of the recent CSIS China-Taiwan war games. Others (you know who you are) need not.

    1) China is likely to lose.

    2) The cost to the defenders will be staggering. At least 2 aircraft carriers will be sunk.

Interesting. Here's the link:
https://www.csis.org/analysis/first-battle-next-war-wargaming-chinese-invasion-taiwan
I've also seen it claimed that China has much less ability to survive the kind of sanctions Russia has experienced and that China's demographic collapse is going to occupy its attention more and more in the next few years. I have to hope we never get to this, of course.

[Herman]

I have not read Findlay so I can't comment. On the other hand, you have not read Mommsen and you haughtily dismissed the very idea of reading him, but you signal to know for certain it's outdated with respect to the topic of how empires start and grow. That's fine with me but allow me to believe that professional historians would take a different stance.

Findlay is an economics professor (used to be, he died 2021), I doubt he wrote about empire.

I hate to say it Mommsen was a venerable professor, author and classicist, but he's from the mid-nineteenth century! So much has happened in Roman history since then.

[Fëanor]

I have not read Findlay so I can't comment. On the other hand, you have not read Mommsen and you haughtily dismissed the very idea of reading him, but you signal to know for certain it's outdated with respect to the topic of how empires start and grow. That's fine with me but allow me to believe that professional historians would take a different stance.

Todd need not go back to the Roman Empire, he need only go back to 1938.

[Todd]

Findlay is an economics professor (used to be, he died 2021), I doubt he wrote about empire.

So you are not familiar with the work I reference.

Todd need not go back to the Roman Empire, he need only go back to 1938.

Godwin's Law.

[Karl Henning]

I fail to see what never being OK with war has to do with the reality of war when it comes to a country ....

"Those who do not wield a sword may nevertheless die on one."

[Todd]

Ukraine news – live: Toll from Russian strike on Dnipro rises to 20 as Sunak confirms tanks supply to Kyiv

Only 20 dead so far in the latest missile strike in this war of attrition.  Or at least, only 20 reported dead.  The Ukrainians have been lying about the death toll, at least if US military reports can be considered reliable.  I know Russia was supposed to have run out of such weapons by now, but this time they really are close to being depleted.  Let's keep up the current policy.  Let's fight Russia to the very last Ukrainian if need be.

[Fëanor]

Godwin's Law.

Of course, Godwin's Law: Godwin implied that the case of Nazi Germany was so horrifically unique, (Nazi exceptionalism), that comparisons to it are irrelevant or grossly hyperbolic.

... Unfortunately that is frequently not the case.

[Jo498]

The Nazis were a budding/wannabe Empire, the US is a post peak Empire, Russia is an already crumbled Empire fighting against falling further into mediocrity. That's why Rome is a more relevant reference than anything 1938 (The crumbling Empire back then was the British one but there wasn't a similar or analogue situation to today.)

[Todd]

Of course, Godwin's Law: Godwin implied that the case of Nazi Germany was so horrifically unique, (Nazi exceptionalism), that comparisons to it are irrelevant or grossly hyperbolic.

... Unfortunately that is frequently not the case.

Doubling down on Godwin's Law while ignoring facts.  Excellent.

One would think that people would try just that little bit harder to come up with an irrelevant and completely incorrect historical comparison.  Here's a fun article: How Americans Described Evil Before Hitler

I say bring back Nebuchadnezzar!

The Nazis were a budding/wannabe Empire, the US is a post peak Empire, Russia is an already crumbled Empire fighting against falling further into mediocrity. That's why Rome is a more relevant reference than anything 1938 (The crumbling Empire back then was the British one but there wasn't a similar or analogue situation to today.)

You and your accurate summation.

[Fëanor]

Doubling down on Godwin's Law while ignoring facts.  Excellent.

One would think that people would try just that little bit harder to come up with an irrelevant and completely incorrect historical comparison.  Here's a fun article: How Americans Described Evil Before Hitler

Yeah, I skimmed that article:  fun read as you say.  But it mainly demonstrates that Hitler was not so unique.  Really, the only thing unique was that he and is henchmen had industrial means to carry out murder.  (Other would have done similar if they'd had those means -- mind you, Hutus manage to kill at least 500k in Rwanda with just pangas.)

The comparison to the Munich Agreement is relevant in that Chamberlain's appeasement failed in short order because he failed to understand that Hitler's goals were much broader than Sudetenland and  would not be satisfied by the gesture.  The same is true your suggested solution to the Ukraine "special military operation".

Putin's goals will not be satisfied by, say, ceding Crimea and Donbas, and I would say, not even by promising to keep Ukraine out of NATO and the EU.  Putin's goal, (irrespective of likelihood of success), is direct domination of eastern Europe and the enfeeblement of liberal democracy in western Europe and beyond.

[Todd]

Yeah, I skimmed that article:  fun read as you say.  But it mainly demonstrates that Hitler was not so unique.  Really, the only thing unique was that he and is henchmen had industrial means to carry out murder.  (Other would have done similar if they'd had those means -- mind you, Hutus manage to kill at least 500k in Rwanda with just pangas.)

The comparison to the Munich Agreement is relevant in that Chamberlain's appeasement failed in short order because he failed to understand that Hitler's goals were much broader than Sudetenland and  would not be satisfied by the gesture.  The same is true your suggested solution to the Ukraine "special military operation".

Putin's goals will not be satisfied by, say, ceding Crimea and Donbas, and I would say, not even by promising to keep Ukraine out of NATO and the EU.  Putin's goal, (irrespective of likelihood of success), is direct domination of eastern Europe and the enfeeblement of liberal democracy in western Europe and beyond.

Tripling down in one morning.  How many times can you prove Godwin's Law in one day?

Nazi Germany and Putin's Russia are not equivalent.

Go!

[drogulus]

    Putin has relied on the energy gambit to force Europe to cease their drip feed of weapons to Ukraine. That's failed.

    What's a good negotiation strategy for Ukraine? It's clear to me that the drip feed, whether it was intended to force the Ukes to stop fighting or not, won't force them to negotiate their surrender. Given that, and the desire of NATO countries to bring an end to the fighting sooner rather than later, the best move would be to supply heavy weapons now now now to help the Ukes get as close to their negotiation goals as they can.

    Since Russia is unmoved by the documents it signs I deem the only effective negotiations will be to ratify facts on the ground and enforce them with very heavy facts with 120mm smooth bore guns.

   

[LKB]

Comical tough guy talk.

Actually, I have a reputation for being fairly serious, at least where music is concerned.

As for the " tough guy " part, l can say that I've survived the following:

The wrong end of a knife,
The wrong end of a gun,
Blood poisoning,
Near drowning, and
Chemical poisoning. ( This last was an attempt on my life some forty years ago, and left me with permanent brain damage. The perpetrator, on the other hand, did not survive. )

There was a time when l was comfortable with military weaponry, and I've hunted two-legged targets who were essentially indistinguishable from myself. That period didn't last very long, but l learned some valuable lessons which are still of some aide to me.

I keep one momento from my old life, a sanitized copy of a document which required a Q-Clearance, back in the day. I was granted possession on the condition that l surrender it upon request, which of course I'll be happy to do. ( I once [ and only once ] showed this document to a good friend who held the same clearance, and it was fun watching his eyes pop... )

So, does any of that make me " tough "?

Maybe... but at times l suspect l was lucky to escape unscathed, and certainly didn't in the one instance.

ln any event, l would say that making assumptions about your fellow posters here - about whom you know essentially nothing - may be inadvisable. Everyone has their own story, and some may not reside within your range of experience.

[Todd]

Actually, I have a reputation for being fairly serious, at least where music is concerned.

As for the " tough guy " part, l can say that I've survived the following:

The wrong end of a knife,
The wrong end of a gun,
Blood poisoning,
Near drowning, and
Chemical poisoning. ( This last was an attempt on my life some forty years ago, and left me with permanent brain damage. The perpetrator, on the other hand, did not survive. )

There was a time when l was comfortable with military weaponry, and I've hunted two-legged targets who were essentially indistinguishable from myself. That period didn't last very long, but l learned some valuable lessons which are still of some aide to me.

I keep one momento from my old life, a sanitized copy of a document which required a Q-Clearance, back in the day. I was granted possession on the condition that l surrender it upon request, which of course I'll be happy to do. ( I once [ and only once ] showed this document to a good friend who held the same clearance, and it was fun watching his eyes pop... )

So, does any of that make me " tough "?

Maybe... but at times l suspect l was lucky to escape unscathed, and certainly didn't in the one instance.

ln any event, l would say that making assumptions about your fellow posters here - about whom you know essentially nothing - may be inadvisable. Everyone has their own story, and some may not reside within your range of experience.

This is just so good.

You are very tough.

[drogulus]

     The question is whether it's wise to give the adversary what it wants before you sit down to talk peace.

     It's not a good idea, and impractical to imagine we can give Ukraine away while they continue to fight to keep it for themselves.

     The present war came after Putin ignored the terms of agreements made. Will he keep to a new one?

     I wouldn't.  I've got peacemongers across the table from me, and there's nothing better than that!

[Florestan]

I hate to say it Mommsen was a venerable professor, author and classicist, but he's from the mid-nineteenth century! So much has happened in Roman history since then.

Like what? Cesar survived assassination? Anthony defeated Octavian Augustus? Rome failed to conquer Hispania?

[Que]

More "liberal/neocon" analysis:

Almost half of global strategists think Russia could become a failed state within the next 10 years

(Another article on fortune.com, different author)


The benefits of Russia's coming disintegration

(Politico.eu)

[Fëanor]

Nazi Germany and Putin's Russia are not equivalent.

Go!

Right you are, but I'm not talking about the equivalence of Nazi Germany and Putin's Russia.  I talking about why appeasement of Putin in case of Ukraine will would have an failure equivalent to that of Munich Agreement on account of a misunderstanding of Putin's actual objectives as of Hitler's.