What exactly is Ukraine trying to defend?

[doubtingthomas]

If you earnestly believe giving in to Putin on Ukraine will end suffering, calamity, displacement, and death in the region you are beyond naïve.

I don't understand. Is Putin trying to kill everyone in Ukraine?

Why not let the Ukrainians continue to decide what is best for themselves?

The US wants to give fighter jets to Ukraine. I don't want a nuclear war and the end of civilization as we know it.

[Gadianton]

I'm sympathetic to the view of the U. Chicago guy I linked to elsewhere arguing (7 years ago) that a neutral Ukraine is in the best interest of the US, and anything other than that will be a bloodbath for Ukraine. A large part of his argument was that Putin is driven primarily by fear of NATO expansion.

A couple of problems. Ukraine as a buffer might be in our best interests, but we should at least consider what Ukraine wants also. And, is Putin really driven by fear of NATO expansion, or is NATO expansion his binger-level "what about...!" excuse to play the victim?

One of the problems with Putin and (FSK) KGB-inspired leadership is the Trump-level pathological lying. When a person changes reality on the fly to serve whatever the present purpose is with no regard for treaties and wins by asymmetric warfare -- "evil always triumphs because good is dumb" -- I play by my rules while everyone else is required to play as adults, then you have to assume the worst. And if his real aim has always been expansion, then this is in inexorable problem we're facing, and given Putin's age, it's not going to get put off by much.

As for DT's greatest-good-for-greatest-number today argument, you can make the same argument over any terrorist situation. Then it would be, we should always negotiate with terrorists for the sake of the victims. But in this case, even if we believed that, the victims aren't calling for us to cut a deal to save them, but to either take the enemy out, or if we won't do that, slip them a weapon so they can escape.

The bad thing for us is that it does feel like we're using them to fight our battle, even if it is wanted for them.

[Moksha]

Does Russia want to destroy Ukraine?

For the glory of Putin.

[Jersey Girl]

I'll give this a whirl.

If you earnestly believe giving in to Putin on Ukraine will end suffering, calamity, displacement, and death in the region you are beyond naïve.

I don't understand. Is Putin trying to kill everyone in Ukraine?

Putin wants to restore the Soviet Union bite by bite. He's currently trying to consume Ukraine. If he had his way, he'd keep going until he consumed ALL of Europe.

Why not let the Ukrainians continue to decide what is best for themselves?

The US wants to give fighter jets to Ukraine. I don't want a nuclear war and the end of civilization as we know it.

The US wants Poland to give fighter jets to Ukraine and in turn, the US will replace Poland's loss with old US fighter jets. They're trying to give Ukraine air power because the sky is the only way they can take a chunk out of Russian aircraft/ artillery,/troop size/fuel tankers and do it relatively fast. As I understand it (and I don't claim to fully understand, I'm learning like you are) once all of that is accomplished, the conflict will become an urban war and with a then reduced Russian military, and the fact that the war will be on Ukraine's own turf, the Ukrainians will have the upper hand and be able to dick away Russian troops quicker and faster than Russian can keep up with.

I heard Lt. Col. Vindman do an interview today (actually technically yesterday) where he said the US and Poland don't have to give fighter jets to Ukraine. What they need to do is have Poland assemble the fleet of jets and let Ukrainian pilots come over the border and fly them out. Then the US replaces that fleet for Poland.

That does seem to make some sense to me in some sort of play the game way.

with regard to to nuclear war. There's no telling. Putin isn't playing by the rules, NATO is trying to create workarounds of the rules, and Putin is probably clinically nuts. Vindman says we need to do the transfer of jets NOW and set up supply depots NOW to keep the Ukrainians going so they can fight the war themselves. If we fail to do that, he says we'll be facing even harder choices in a month and he means nukes.

Look on the other Ukrainian War thread and find a recent post of mine that links to the interview with Vindman. He has no political skin in the game (he neither favors Republicans nor Democrats and is equally critical of both) and his whole interview is filled with strategies I'm not hearing anywhere else.

But don't go by me. I don't know anything about anything. I'm trying to learn and figure this out like you are. I think I may be a few steps ahead of you is all. I'm supposed to read up on the Battle of Stalingrad now so I can understand the ramifications of urban warfare. Wish me luck!

If anyone reads this post who is more knowledgeable than I am and sees that I've made mistakes, please correct them for me. I don't want to steer DT wrong and if I screwed up, I want to know it myself.

[Dr. Shades]

Hi doubtingthomas,

I’m going to assume that you live in the United States. If China invaded the U.S.A., would you agitate for giving them anything they want in order to end the war at any cost, like you say Ukraine should do?

[Xenophon]

As the good Dean elaborates upthread currently Ukraine serves as a an insulator between NATO and Russia, not only as a geographical intentity but also in its ability to currently absorb the impact of conflict. If preventing nuclear war is really your biggest concern I'd suggest stamping out Russian aggression now is a better approach than if they get into direct conflict with a NATO ally (specifically Romania would be the next logical target).

It is impossible to know exactly what would happen post Russian occupation of Ukraine but given his stated goals I see no reason to expect Putin to stop. While we have a willing ally to fight in proxy it is highly logical to support them.

[doubtingthomas]

Hi doubtingthomas,

If China invaded the U.S.A., would you agitate for giving them anything they want in order to end the war at any cost, like you say Ukraine should do?

Corporations control the US government. The prevalence of diabetes is projected to increase by 54% in 2030, Americans are overworking and retiring with heart disease. Where is the freedom? I wouldn't be willing to die for my country.

Imagine Canada and Mexico trying to form a military alliance with China or Russia, you think the US wouldn't invade them? Please answer the question.

[doubtingthomas]

with regard to to nuclear war. There's no telling. Putin isn't playing by the rules, NATO is trying to create workarounds of the rules, and Putin is probably clinically nuts. Vindman says we need to do the transfer of jets NOW and set up supply depots NOW to keep the Ukrainians going so they can fight the war themselves. If we fail to do that, he says we'll be facing even harder choices in a month and he means nukes.

It is scary when you think about it.

[MeDotOrg]

The short answer to what the Ukrainians are trying to defend:

Sovereignty.

They want the ability to make independent decisions as an independent country. They want the ability to choose their alliances. Because Ukraine shares a border with Russia, Putin expects them to be a Satellite. He expects them to not exercise their rights as a sovereign state.

The problem is that the Warsaw Pact hegemony over Eastern Europe has crumbled. For political, economic and social progress, the former Warsaw Pact states are looking to the West. Putin's invasion of Ukraine has poured gasoline on the fire. Finland and Sweden are now asking for membership in NATO. The problem is that the former satellite states know the corruption and oppression that comes with a Russian alliance. Putin's war means that no country would voluntarily enter into a satellite relationship with Russia.

Before the breakup of the Soviet Union, Russia was one of two superpowers. In the last 2 weeks, their ability to effectively project as a regional power has been diminished. And Putin's paranoia in this situation is the most frightening thing in the short term.

[Jersey Girl]

with regard to to nuclear war. There's no telling. Putin isn't playing by the rules, NATO is trying to create workarounds of the rules, and Putin is probably clinically nuts. Vindman says we need to do the transfer of jets NOW and set up supply depots NOW to keep the Ukrainians going so they can fight the war themselves. If we fail to do that, he says we'll be facing even harder choices in a month and he means nukes.

It is scary when you think about it.

Listen to this by Vindman. This is the video I mentioned.

Alexander Vindman: The U.S. Is at Great Risk of Ending Up in This War | Amanpour and Company

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySQX9HLnYwU