Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
If Ukraine Wins, Who Loses?
There’s the obvious answers – Putin, the image of Russian might, the Duginist dream of solidifying Russian control over its insolent children.
Who else? The Russian Orthodox Church, for declaring this a holy war? Xi, for his association with a loser whose actions renewed Taiwanese determination to stave off an invasion? The countries that have been buying Russian military gear and now have a rep, however justified, for buying junk? US pundits who backed Russia’s invasion? Renewable energy advocates, suddenly on the back foot because nuclear is a better option than Russian gas? US intelligence agencies that failed to figure out how the Russian forces are ancient and hollowed out by corruption?
You could also note who else wins: the West, for one. Superior armaments and tech, better logistics, the products of a more energetic and innovative culture. I suspect there’s a non-insubstantial intersection between those who are comfy with Russian control of Ukraine and those who would be irritated by a Western win, because the West is decadent and subject to rule from our Davos overlords, and ought not to prevail until it is overhauled and remade.
This is not a thread about whether Ukraine will win, or what victory looks like. Just a question about what shakes out when it is apparent to all that Russia could not prevail.
Published in General
BTW, Croatia is blocking Sweden and Finland from joining Nato. For its own ethnic reasons wrt Bosnia.
The only thing that Russia has ever made out of a mess is a bigger mess.
Amen – Testify, brother!
Biden is incapable of coherent speech. Is it any wonder he is incapable of explaining National interests. His team is fundamentally not interested in what is in the best interest of the US so they don’t bother.
True, though from what I see there are many more Democrats involved in the grift than GOP. Probably because the GOP are not in the position to leverage the graft.
Considering how well we backed up the Afghanistan government and how that turned out if Ukraine was smart they would get as far away as possible from us. But I suspect there is just too much money and grift involved.
I disagree within this context. As of right now NATO has proven to be tremendously effective for its member states. I may have agreed that it was unwise to expand NATO in the first place, but you can’t unscramble eggs. I might also agree that NATO should perhaps have been disbanded at the end of the cold war.
The question of whether or not NATO is good for the US is a point we can debate. It certainly has exposed the US to tremendous liabilities. Also it has been expensive for the US. That having been said it has enhanced US geostrategic standing for many years. It has allow the US to maintain a strategic foothold in Europe, again we can argue if this is good or not.
On this point we agree whole heartedly. We have more Flag officers in uniform right now than during World War 2. We need to reform our bloated military as well.
FWIW, @jameslileks specifically said:
Now, you may be saying that how it shakes out depends on exactly how UKR achieved victory, which is fair. But that is not “defining winning.”
That appears to be an intraparty debate in Croatia. We’ll have to see how it goes, but even the possibility shows the miscalculation of the Russians in starting this war. Short term it is a disaster, medium term it is a setback. Time will tell in the long term but my sense is it benefits China more than Russia. Although I guess anything that weakens the US benefits both countries.
If they really believed this, they would have us nuking up to defend ourselves against Russia.
Ever since Obama set the world on fire, I have said: “I have a score card and I still can’t tell the players…”
I think you’re close on some of this, but I just don’t know who you might be referring to. Speaking only for myself, I won’t be irritated if Ukraine wins because I don’t know enough or care enough one way or the other. However, the West is decadent and increasingly subjecting citizens to the ends of and rule by unelected overlords in various ways. That does not imply any oughts as it relates to losing war or desire for self destructive extirpation of our cultural cancers.
They aren’t losing it either- too soon to tell. It is obvious to anyone not blinded by their ideology that Russia has committed a tremendous blunder. But win, lose or draw the Ukrainians have demonstrated to the world they are a legitimate state & no one’s puppet- despite claims made by those such as you. At this point Russia is clearly losing- ie it has failed in its plan to “capture” Ukraine and split NATO. Ukraine was only part of Putin’s goals and he will get only part of it at best- but made Ukraine an avowed enemy and united NATO- something no one else could do- who else could get Germany to increase defense expenditures by $100 billion. Even if Russia succeeds in getting the Donbas, it has shot itself in the foot (if not the head)-it is a pariah state. Russia has succeeded in isolating itself and has shown that it is a second rate power heading to third rate- a kleptocratic gas station with nukes.
That is the really weird part. Under Obama we had a great reset. HRC went over and had a big red button that said reset and all. They sent about every business person they could find on junkets to get commerce going with Russia. That is all through the Obama administration and all of a sudden Trump is elected and Russia is a very bad place and Putin is the worse. After 8 years of Obama cozying up to them? WTF happened? Did they not get enough grift back?
Great. Let’s cut the strings.
It really does invite more study. What did Obama’s “more flexibility” comment to Medvedev mean? The press wasn’t the least bit curious as that information was “transmitted to Vladimir.” (And can you imagine if Trump had been caught on mic saying something like that?) With the assistance of the Clintons, the Russians secure a North American uranium company that gives them control of one-fifth of U.S. uranium production, and nobody cares. Well, many of us on the right cared about it, but the left was completely uninterested in the subject. And then President Trump appears and the Democrats suddenly turn on Russia and make it out to be the source of all evil in the world in their quest to connect President Trump to Russia, first through a fake Pee Dossier (so laughably dumb I can’t believe the left fell for it, but they did), and then through several other fake attempts to bring the President down by labeling him a Russian puppet.
But who’d been doing Russia’s bidding for most of the 21st Century? Why, that would be the Democrats.
As I say, this sudden change invites more study. Anyone up to it?
Nope.
Certainly the retirement of every single officer whose career was based upon advancing the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion agenda.
I was thinking it depends on what frame we consider. And then I thought. The children. The children always lose.
And I’m the one blinded by ideology?
That’s all the 4 stars and probably most of the 1-3 stars.
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/exhausted-ukrainian-soldiers-return-eastern-130359514.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cubW9vbm9mYWxhYmFtYS5vcmcv&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAEUCQd0tuTeZ4qbmAjaipUNPdk5_5n6-VSdahEn0qaUYRX002g7swDw0vqhquLdRTj4rmzHiRfNKZ_oZEKgDm2QuLN9qRvwghIJoKMgoQoV3A02Uszq-It5wU3_hlzG6AweTCZR_wls17-cx12zlQP6cGu-gSPUbjLhxfWL5s187
Nor has it stated what the desired outcome is. I think this is a big deal. What conflict has the US become involved in in the last 75 years where the government hasn’t tried to sell its position to the public?
The necessity for our involvement in this conflict is maintaining a world order in which sovereignty and nuclear arms treaties are respected. These principles have kept the world pretty much war free since World War II. We spent a lot of money and time hammering out agreements to make it so.
Putin is simply a global anarchist with no respect for written law.
Russia is a member of the International Court of Justice in the Hague. That is where conflicts between sovereign nations are tried. That is where Putin belongs. Instead, he’s a madman with his hand on a nuclear bomb. And he is evil. A good person saves lives and builds homes for people. Only truly evil people kill people for no reason and destroy cities and towns.
He has created a global refugee crisis that he should pay for. Every cent that he has cost individuals in Ukraine.
I don’t need anyone to explain to me why the United States has an interest in this war.
I don’t know how this should be resolved. If it had been handled February 24 by a united global community against Putin, we wouldn’t be here today. As it stands, Putin has managed to create uncertainty for the entire world. I don’t know how this will end, but I do understand our interest in the situation.
Last night I dreamed that Putin nuked Delaware.
So the nuclear apocalypse dreams are back. Haven’t had one of those since the 1980s.
So glad Reagan is in charge.
Oh, . . . wait.
And this can’t happen now because?
This is one of the few aspects of this tragic event that I consider particularly positive.
Zelensky’s opinion about renewables, whatever it is, is irrelevant. What matters is that the war highlights the danger of western Europe’s dependence on Russian fossil fuels. Further, a Ukrainian victory — or even, at this point, a Russian victory that took far longer and cost far more than anyone expected — increases the perception that Russia is not a strong and reliable trading partner for such a critical resource.
What that means is that Europe has to consider being more energy independent, since there is no ready fossil fuel import alternative that can match Russian oil and gas.
And any time a nation seriously considers becoming energy independent, it has to take a realistic look at wind and solar — and then conclude that they aren’t viable alternatives to reliable baseload power. That’s good, because it encourages them to stop thinking about these sources as real alternatives to more traditional fossil fuel, nuclear, and hydroelectric power.
Alternative energy stops being attractive to people experiencing energy poverty. It’s kind of analogous to the sudden lack of interest in the phrase “birthing person.” Crises create focus.
We are not involved in any nuclear arms treaty with Ukraine. Back to the topic, Truth is a loser in this conflict. It is more true than ever that Truth is the first casualty in war.
I urge everyone to watch that Tucker bit Flick linked. (I’ve got it cued up to the good (bad) stuff.)
The way Schiff, et al speak, this is exactly what so many of us feared: a U.S./Russia war with Ukraine as the battleground (and soon to be pile of rubble because of U.S. involvement). They make no bones about it. “We” are at war with Russia, they say. And “we” are not interested in negotiating a peace. “We” are in it for the long haul, “until victory is won!”
Hold on to your wallets, taxpayers! You’re funding World War III as we speak.
And Tucker asks a great question: Why is U.S. foreign policy in Ukraine being handled by Congress’s most hysterical and blatant liars and frauds? Why, for example, is Adam Schiff, who once claimed he had hard proof Trump was a Russian puppet, heading up our delegation to Ukraine?
I hate them all with a red-hot fury.
I do.
Did you grow up in the upper east side of Manhattan? Back in the 80’s fashionable upper east side Moms were worried about their children having nightmares about nuclear winter.