Russian Ukraine shenanigans

[Lawman]

Couldn’t agree more. Could we also include enforcing our own federal laws too?  My post was more tongue in cheek dig at Germany. 

I mean there’s plenty to pick on with the Germans. Lord knows I’ve seen it since I was stationed there all of 4 years. Still they’ve become the easy button to sell people on the populism message of “we gotta take care of our own.”

It’s an old bias that I was happy to see Trump call out (callous as his normal method) but it’s not effectively true anymore. They are starting to fix their long overdue stupidity. The first step in that was getting rid of Merkle who for the whole of the Trump admin just adopted the contrarian position along with people like Trudeau rather than actually worked to strengthen NATO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[O Face]

31 minutes ago, Stoker said:

The good news for those of you worried about the (tiny fraction of the) debt imposed on your children due to Ukraine spending is that, if we just let the Russians roll over Ukraine and a few other countries, your kids won't need to worry about the debt, because they'll be too worried about dying in a conflict with Putin's successor when he invades the Baltics or Poland.

Deterrence is always much cheaper than the inevitable fight after appeasement.

For fuck’s sake… The point I obviously haven’t made clear, is that the US government spending on Ukraine is NEVER going to be too popular while shit is falling apart at home. I’m not saying war is cheaper than deterrence, or that Russia is actually awesome, or that Putin is a great guy; I hope he chokes and dies on his borscht tonight. But when the average American is struggling to put food on the table, cutting another couple hundred billion $ to a country far away from home is ALWAYS gonna be a tough sell. And calling everyone who disagrees an idiot or Putin jock-sniffer won’t help your cause either. 

Edited December 13, 2023 by O Face
,

[Lord Ratner]

1 hour ago, tac airlifter said:

However the current situation is that we're rushing to rescue Western Europe who doesn't feel threatened or inclined to break the bank investing militarily due to ann imminent Russian invasion.

Says who?

 

One of the primary reasons I support Ukraine is because they are willing to die for their country. Western Europe is no where in my calculus. 

[tac airlifter]

1 hour ago, Lord Ratner said:

One of the primary reasons I support Ukraine is because they are willing to die for their country. Western Europe is no where in my calculus. 

An argument I was replying to was essentially that we must protect Ukraine in order to defend NATO from follow on incursion.  You're making an unrelated point, which although laudable, is not good enough reason for me to support continued un-audited spending on UKR while our border remains open.  Sorry dude, US first then I'm open to your perspective.

[HeloDude]

10 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

Says who?

 

One of the primary reasons I support Ukraine is because they are willing to die for their country. Western Europe is no where in my calculus. 

If the Ukrainians were willing to die for their country then you wouldn’t need forced conscription.  And this goes for any country in a similar situation.  This is the exact opposite of freedom by the way.

[Lawman]

If the Ukrainians were willing to die for their country then you wouldn’t need forced conscription.  And this goes for any country in a similar situation.  This is the exact opposite of freedom by the way.

We had forced conscription in both world wars to meet the ever churning requirement for manpower. We also did deferments of people who wanted to serve but were judged to be to vital in position and told no they couldn’t serve. Nobody would argue about the righteousness of our cause in the Second World War, yet it took 2/3 of our military being drafted to meet the requirements of it. By the beginning of 1945 there was a real discussion at the White House/Chief of staff levels on how we were going to apportion and release vs not release the ETO troops. The decision was those that “done enough” could go, those that hadn’t would serve as the veterans and the units would be backfilled with new inductees because of the manpower requirements that taking and occupying Japan would have required. Remember this is after we fought for Saipan and started seeing the suicidal side of Japanese resolve. The points episode of BOBs barely scratched this topic, same as Flags of our Fathers talked about war fatigue in funding and a desire by many to make terms with the Japanese.

Ukraine is not in a unique situation, it’s a reality of any nation caught in an existential struggle for its existence managing the total economic and manpower of its nation to grant it the means to continue the war.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HeloDude]

Just now, Lawman said:

We had forced conscription in both world wars to meet the ever churning requirement for manpower. We also did deferments of people who wanted to serve but were judged to be to vital in position and told no they couldn’t serve. Nobody would argue about the righteousness of our cause in the Second World War, but by the beginning of 1945 there was a real discussion at the White House/Chief of staff levels on how we were going to not let the ETO troops leave and turn their enlistments to indefinite because of the manpower requirements that taking and occupying Japan would have required. The points episode of BOBs barely scratched this topic, same as Flags of our Fathers talked about war fatigue in funding and a desire by many to make terms with the Japanese.

Ukraine is not in a unique situation, it’s a reality of any nation caught in an existential struggle for its existence managing the total economic and manpower of its nation to grant it the means to continue the war.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Conveniently you also left off the forced conscription for fighting in Korea and Vietnam.  But to your direct point about WW2, yes, I’m also against conscription if we found ourselves in another world war.  You are truly not free if you are told to pick up a gun and go to war, and if you won’t, the government will criminalize you for it.  If a country is worth fighting for, then you’ll have enough people voluntarily willing to fight for it.

[Clark Griswold]

The Democratic coalition could make this divide go away on Ukraine funding tomorrow if they proposed paying for it via war bonds or tax increases paid by the investor / corporate class (top 0.1%) with passive income tax reforms AND immigration enforcement / border security / reasonable asylum law interpretation

Do those two things explicitly to get Ukrainian funding and we can move to the next political argument


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lawman]

Conveniently you also left off the forced conscription for fighting in Korea and Vietnam.  But to your direct point about WW2, yes, I’m also against conscription if we found ourselves in another world war.  You are truly not free if you are told to pick up a gun and go to war, and if you won’t, the government will criminalize you for it.  If a country is worth fighting for, then you’ll have enough people voluntarily willing to fight for it.

It wasn’t “worth fighting for” against the Nazis by your standard. If it had been we wouldn’t have needed 2/3 of our military to be forced into uniform while the rest of our population was told no there won’t be a new model of Chevrolet this year, we’re making M5 tanks though if you’re interested in driving one. And while it’s a popular myth, most of the people that served in the wartime position of Vietnam weren’t draftees. Draftees were bulk used to maintain commitments abroad. Only a quarter ever went to South East Asia as a theatre, roughly a third of that number served in support capacities in places like Thailand on the periphery.

Now I’ve got no doubt when actual Nazis started hitting our cities directly there would be a realization by plenty that something needed to be done and the time to act was now, but that’s far to late to build a military out of which is something a short range problem focused populace will never be capable of understanding. That’s why we started drafting people in 1940 before a single bomb was dropped on our soil. The powers that be were smart enough to read the tea leaves.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HeloDude]

Just now, Lawman said:

It wasn’t “worth fighting for” against the Nazis by your standard. If it had been we wouldn’t have needed 2/3 of our military to be forced into uniform while the rest of our population was told no there won’t be a new model of Chevrolet this year, we’re making M5 tanks though if you’re interested in driving one.

Now I’ve got no doubt when actual Nazis started hitting our cities directly there would be a realization by plenty that something needed to be done and the time to act was now, but that’s far to late to build a military out of which is something a short range problem focused populace will never be capable of understanding. That’s why we started drafting people in 1940 before a single bomb was dropped on our soil. The powers that be were smart enough to read the tea leaves.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If not enough people voluntarily wanted to fight the Nazis, then no, to them it wasn’t worth it.  You either have enough volunteers under the terms of an agreement (ie an enlistment) or you don’t.  You can use whatever emotional arguments you want, but either you believe in personal freedom to go/not to go a war if asked, or you don’t believe in it.  If freedom and liberty and can be suspended then you were never actually free.  Don’t forget, democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

[Lawman]

If not enough people voluntarily wanted to fight the Nazis, then no, to them it wasn’t worth it.  You either have enough volunteers under the terms of an agreement (ie an enlistment) or you don’t.  You can use whatever emotional arguments you want, but either you believe in personal freedom to go/not to go a war if asked, or you don’t believe in it.  If freedom and liberty and can be suspended then you were never actually free.  Don’t forget, democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

Your freedom and liberty to choose is at the ballot box. Same as it is for the Ukrainians. If you don’t want a draft than elect people to put it into law that you will never use one. We are and have been for several decades and “all volunteer force” just ignore things like stop loss or refusing to grant retirements and so forth. If the political sway is such that something as unpopular as a draft can happen without the immediate loss of those reps that enacted it surviving with their seat intact guess what, that’s consensus and by definition consent of the governed.

We participate in a society of voices and opinions with general consensus being the path forward. Saying “you can’t make me fight” when we have laws stating yes we can which were enacted by elected representatives is no different than the liberal hissyfits of “he’s not my president” when Trump or Bush were elected.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HeloDude]

1 hour ago, Lawman said:

Your freedom and liberty to choose is at the ballot box.

Oh man…some of the most dangerous words I’ve heard or read.  This means that my liberty and freedom only exist to what elected officials allow me to have…since they were voted in.

[ClearedHot]

[HeloDude]

10 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

Is this including the college football thread?

[Lawman]

Oh man…some of the most dangerous words I’ve heard or read.  This means that my liberty and freedom only exist to what elected officials allow me to have…since they were voted in.

No it means when somebody is screaming that Ukrainians don’t have the will to fight because of conscription it ignores the fact they like us have a representative democratic process.

If conscription was so out of line with the will of the represented it would result in 1 of 2 options; vote out those reps in a referendum (again the ballot box) or have a revolution.

Since none have occurred the portrayal as Ukrainians being unwilling to fight because people are being jailed or running away in refusal is misrepresenting the facts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[uhhello]

5 minutes ago, Lawman said:

No it means when somebody is screaming that Ukrainians don’t have the will to fight because of conscription it ignores the fact they like us have a representative democratic process.

If conscription was so out of line with the will of the represented it would result in 1 of 2 options; vote out those reps in a referendum (again the ballot box) or have a revolution.

Since none have occurred the portrayal as Ukrainians being unwilling to fight because people are being jailed or running away in refusal is misrepresenting the facts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Unless the elections are cancelled.....

 

https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-birthday-grenade-b1b82e4f84eb5a39286d1500cf49fcd1

Edited December 13, 2023 by uhhello

[Lawman]

Unless the elections are cancelled.....
 
https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-birthday-grenade-b1b82e4f84eb5a39286d1500cf49fcd1

Which would seem weird if not for the fact it’s permitted under their law in time of Martial Law/War.

That then opens up option 2 for popular referendum/revolution but the polling is showing something in the 70-80% of Ukrainians being against holding an election with a large portion of their population unable to participate. So that’s not likely to materialize either.

The political pressure in Zelenskyy to hold an election and potentially change the course of the war effort isn’t coming from Ukraine. It’s coming from people on our side of the Atlantic choosing to use it as a justification to end funding they’ve called to end before any announcement was made.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[uhhello]

5 minutes ago, Lawman said:

 

Which would seem weird if not for the fact it’s permitted under their law in time of Martial Law/War.

That then opens up option 2 for popular referendum/revolution but the polling is showing something in the 70-80% of Ukrainians being against holding an election with a large portion of their population unable to participate. So that’s not likely to materialize either.

The political pressure in Zelenskyy to hold an election and potentially change the course of the war effort isn’t coming from Ukraine. It’s coming from people on our side of the Atlantic choosing to use it as a justification to end funding they’ve called to end before any announcement was made.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Of course.  But the perception is a mother fucker

[BashiChuni]

5 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

which face is general chang? asking for a friend

[Lord Ratner]

17 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

An argument I was replying to was essentially that we must protect Ukraine in order to defend NATO from follow on incursion.  You're making an unrelated point, which although laudable, is not good enough reason for me to support continued un-audited spending on UKR while our border remains open.  Sorry dude, US first then I'm open to your perspective.

I don't tie the border to my support for international policy. Both sides are being really cute trying to connect the two, but let's face it, the border isn't being dealt with because the Democrats don't want to deal with it. And when Republicans had the opportunity to, they didn't.

 

By this twisted logic, the United States should deal with no international issues unless the domestic issues are suitably addressed. But when your party loses elections, you don't get to decide what domestic issues get addressed.

 

You're basically arguing for an all or nothing approach, but you certainly can do, but I find it to be a completely unrealistic political philosophy.

[Lord Ratner]

8 hours ago, HeloDude said:

If the Ukrainians were willing to die for their country then you wouldn’t need forced conscription.  And this goes for any country in a similar situation.  This is the exact opposite of freedom by the way.

Yeah that's just not how countries have ever worked. Including the freeest bestest country in the world, the United States.

 

Conscription is a age-old and normal component of statehood.

 

World war II would have worked a lot differently without draft. And I don't think the world would have been better off if the axis had won...

[Lawman]

Of course.  But the perception is a mother er

Story of this damn war apparently…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lord Ratner]

7 hours ago, HeloDude said:

If not enough people voluntarily wanted to fight the Nazis, then no, to them it wasn’t worth it.  You either have enough volunteers under the terms of an agreement (ie an enlistment) or you don’t.  You can use whatever emotional arguments you want, but either you believe in personal freedom to go/not to go a war if asked, or you don’t believe in it.  If freedom and liberty and can be suspended then you were never actually free.  Don’t forget, democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

This is why libertarianism is ultimately a failed ideology. Honestly I put it into the same category as communism. Romanticized ideals of how the world should be, that never survive contact with real societies.

 

 

[Lawman]

This is why libertarianism is ultimately a failed ideology. Honestly I put it into the same category as communism. Romanticized ideals of how the world should be, that never survive contact with real societies.
 
 

I always like that one “taxation is theft” guy 5 beers in on TDY….

Like bro… where do you think this Per Diem came from?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HeloDude]

1 hour ago, Lord Ratner said:

Yeah that's just not how countries have ever worked. Including the freeest bestest country in the world, the United States.

 

Conscription is a age-old and normal component of statehood.

 

World war II would have worked a lot differently without draft. And I don't think the world would have been better off if the axis had won...

So send people off to die against their will…sounds like so much freedom and liberty.  If enough people won’t voluntarily fight for something they believe in, then it’s not worth it.  This is the litmus test…vs just voting for the government to force your neighbors at the barrel of a gun to go to war.