NYT : Arm Ukraine or Surrender

Anyone else read the New York Times Op ed from a guy called 'Ben Judah' ?

It is so full of twisted-fact and half-truth and his conclusion is totally hilarious , and i would laugh this piece as a comedy post if it is not posted in NYT..

Who in the right mind would push for war against Russia ? is this part of american goverment (not all of them , but many of them in the US govt) really want a shooting war with russia ? and for what reason ? American global leadership ? are americans OUT OF THEIR MIND ?

A shooting war between 2 nuclear forces would end badly for both of them and the rest of the world.

"But if we force Ukraine to surrender, rather than sacrifice lives in a fight for which we have no stomach, then we must accept that it is a surrender, too, for NATO, for Europe and liberal democracy, and for American global leadership. That is the choice before us.

www.nytimes.com...

A few more months without meaningful Western help and Ukraine will have lost the fighting core of its army — and its infatuation with the West. The far-right extremists now on the fringe will ride into Kiev’s parliament on the lids of the caskets being shipped back from the front.

We cannot let this happen. If we believe that Ukraine will one day become a member of the European Union and NATO, then we should be ready to arm it. We must face the fact that the costs of unlimited European Union and NATO expansion have meant war with Russia by proxy — and then fight the war. Having reignited the hottest moments of the Cold War, we must deal with the consequences of encouraging democratization in Eastern Europe.

This logic demands that we send Western military advisers to Kiev, and give the Ukrainians full intelligence and satellite support. And we must ship them guns, tanks, drones and medical kits by the ton. We must even be ready to deploy NATO troops if Russian tanks roll toward Crimea, as many fear they will, to build a land bridge to the mainland of southern Russia.

a reply to: buntalanlucu

Where does he say go to war with Russia? He says arm Ukraine .. you know .. like Russia is doing.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: buntalanlucu

Where does he say go to war with Russia? He says arm Ukraine .. you know .. like Russia is doing.

read the piece... sigh

and ask poland and other baltic states what they get from US goverment for shipping those materiel and men to help ukraine goverment.. especially poland,.,

originally posted by: buntalanlucu

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: buntalanlucu

Where does he say go to war with Russia? He says arm Ukraine .. you know .. like Russia is doing.

read the piece... sigh

and ask poland and other baltic states what they get from US goverment for shipping those materiel and men to help ukraine goverment.. especially poland,.,

Poland, the country who is the most desiring of protection against Russia? They got troops and NATO commander's advising the stockpiling of arms in Poland to protect it. That's what they got.

This logic demands that we send Western military advisers to Kiev, and give the Ukrainians full intelligence and satellite support. And we must ship them guns, tanks, drones and medical kits by the ton.

So he is calling for sending them arms. Russia is supplying arms to the Rebels. He then says we should defend Ukraine if Russia invades. I actually agree. NATO troops in Ukraine would be enough to prevent that though, Putin knows his place, and he is getting very unpopular at home. Attacking NATO would probably cause mass rioting in Russia.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: buntalanlucu

Where does he say go to war with Russia? He says arm Ukraine .. you know .. like Russia is doing.

No, the problem is Russia isn't arming the rebels ... they don't have jet fighters, and only had "one" anti-aircraft battery. They don't have tanks, or artillery. Nor do they have missiles.

However, Ukraine does have all these ... even SAM's and have been using them without prejudice. Almost a million refugees, and god knows how many casualties, a minimum of tens of thousands. But the entire west is playing this as "collateral damage". Which, in and by itself, is a crime.

And the US and Nato has BEEN arming Ukraine, how on earth do you think they posess SAM's in the first place. It's been an issue between Russia and NATO for years. Medvedev was making threats against NATO, if they didn't stop putting up missile systems directed at Russia.

Putin, is a pussy ... he SHOULD use his army, and nuclear ability. Because if he doesn't, Russia is dead ... now or tomorrow isn't important. But the US, has full intend of murdering Russians. How the western media handles the death of Russian civilians in Eastern Ukraine, is something to take as a precursor to what the US and it's European allies have as intention. All you hear in Europe, is a "rumor" on a missile attack ... even here on ATS, there are just "mention" of the catastrophy.

If Putin doesn't wake up ... he could just as well go outside and perform a suicide, because it's equivalent. This isn't the middle ages, backing off and backing off, and hoping the enemy tires. Isn't a viable stragedy. It's an idiodic stragedy, and will only end the same way for Russia, as it has done for Iraq.

So, unless Putin thinks the political chaos in Iraq, is a viable option for the future of Russia. He better put start putting his balls on, or step down for someone else, whose got balls. Unless he's willing to sacrifice Russians, for his own personal money gain.

originally posted by: bjarneorn

No, the problem is Russia isn't arming the rebels ... they don't have jet fighters, and only had "one" anti-aircraft battery. They don't have tanks, or artillery. Nor do they have missiles.

Your post is false.

Russia is supplying them and it's now almost beyond reasonable doubt.
www.bbc.com...

oh the ERA ... I see. And the best thing you can come up with is that fuzzy picture?

Ok. You sure that is really a russian t72? I mean... the US faked whole cities in rooftops of factories during ww2 and you're sure that lonely fuzzy picture is proof of russian involvement and supply of t72 rogatka? Because besides the obvious "fakes" you cant tell a BM by its ERA... its not the ERA that makes the BM.

It be awesome if they all saw this is unnecessary dropped their weapons and went home. It seems to me they are fighting for the sake of fighting.

a reply to: FraternitasSaturni

It's a video, not a fuzzy picture. Take your hate fueled drivel elsewhere.

originally posted by: Fargoth
It be awesome if they all saw this is unnecessary dropped their weapons and went home. It seems to me they are fighting for the sake of fighting.

Russian soldiers aren't even told. They are just sent in.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

OccamsRazor04:

and he is getting very unpopular at home.

Riiiiiight. Have you even stopped to see how the Great U.S. president Barrack Hussein Obama is doing?


Wanna talk about a difference. Thats bad!

a reply to: SurrenderingAmerica

I am no longer responding to your juvenile posts. If you can not stay on topic I will alert a moderator.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: SurrenderingAmerica

I am no longer responding to your juvenile posts. If you can not stay on topic I will alert a moderator.

Ha! Juvenile post?

But we must not let thousands of Ukrainians die because we dithered. We must be honest with them if we are not willing to fight a new Cold War with Russia over Ukrainians’ independence. But if we force Ukraine to surrender, rather than sacrifice lives in a fight for which we have no stomach, then we must accept that it is a surrender, too, for NATO, for Europe and liberal democracy, and for American global leadership. That is the choice before us.

www.nytimes.com...
Read that ish ^^^

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
Russia is supplying them and it's now almost beyond reasonable doubt.
www.bbc.com...

Beyond reasonable doubt ... what do they have tanks? some light ones. Do they have artillery? heavy, no. Do they have jet fighters? no.

What armament are you talking about, some AK47's, grenades, grenade launchers and ammunition? Some light tanks, and personell vehicles.

The Russians gave the rebels one anti-aircraft missile system, and took it back when MH17 was shot down.

Heavy weaponry, today ... is missile systems, Aircraft, with missiles and dropping bombs ability ... tanks, with large projectile ability. These are HEAVY weapons. Some minor weaponry, and light tanks, do not count for heavy armament.

The Ukranian military has heavy armament, and has used this heavy armament on russian civilians residing in Eastern Ukraine. Giving the rebels a means to defend themselves, is the logical thing to do.

a reply to: bjarneorn

They have the latest generation of Russian T-72BM tanks which are only used by Russia and have never been exported to any country.

I know I know .. all you want to talk about is nukes and you wont be happy until Russia uses some.

Russia unofficially supported the eastern ukrainian militias by allowing volunteers to to help, allowing 'care package' to be shipped to the militias , even the militia themselves boasted the large amount of infantrymen related equipment 'donated' by russian people. Now remember officially the russian federation do not support the militia.. Anyone here should differentiate the official stance of a goverment with diplomatic language , and the real ground truth which might be a bit different.

on the other side of the coin..

Western goverment supported the Ukrainian Goverment by sending massive amount of personel and weapons primarily from baltic states , majority from poland. Of course this is also unofficial stance of the US , which practically caught red-handed by the leaked phone call of Victoria Nuland... But OFFICIALY the US goverment never got involved in ukraine regime change.. and the baltic states officially dont help ship weapons to ukraine..

so let see the absurdity here

the unofficially but obviously guilty US goverment's meddling in ukraine , now protesting the unofficially but 'everyone knew it wink wink' russian obvious support for the militias..

both sides are not guilty OFFICIALLY and both sides are guilty UNOFFICIALLY.. if that even make sense lols

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: bjarneorn

They have the latest generation of Russian T-72BM tanks which are only used by Russia and have never been exported to any country.

I know I know .. all you want to talk about is nukes and you wont be happy until Russia uses some.

No they dont have the "latest generation of Russian T-72BM" lol...

You're so anti-russia it makes my stomach turn... I think if people decide to be anti-something, at least let them be anti-something they know at least something about.

originally posted by: SurrenderingAmerica

Are you pretending to be naive? or is it coming naturally?

The US has its testicles hanging out in Iraq with ISIS. The US has a massive tumor called Israel that Russia can poke when ever it pleases. For the US to go and actively battle Russia is suicide.

Unless you've been living under a rock, on another planet, then the simplest brain cells can surely understand that Putin has, indeed, gone off the deep and is making a move on Ukraine. I didn't believe it at first, but there's no doubt now.

You think rebels in Eastern Ukraine (who barely have power, internet and access to decent vehicles) somehow have access to military equipment? The rebels in the east are Russian backed, Russia supplied, Russian re-enforced and probably Russian themselves.

I dont think Putin intended it to go this far when he took Crimea, but he most definitely saw the weakness in Ukraine and NATO and pushed forward. Now he cannot risk looking weak and backing down when Ukraine cannot muster a fight.

Obama is doing everything to stay out of a war, rightly so!

The time has come for tough questions, the only answer is to let Ukraine fight its own fight, win or lose its not our fight.

However, The world and Putin needs to know that win or lose Ukraine must be his last claim. Once again, Poland could be the tipping point of world war!

a reply to: buntalanlucu

It says enough about what NYT has become to even have that on their site.

The worrying thing about it though, it also reflect somewhat the messed up situation it has become now.

It could all end in a reasonable manner very quickly if Kiev was willing to do so and not dancing to their puppet-masters. But Kiev hasn`t shown any of such willingness so far. They have been given change after change to do so, and are still being given.

The support of the new government is also not great, but that shouldn`t come as a surprise when the majority of Ukrainians wanted to be independent but instead have been pushed under the influence of the West.

Why not have "real democratic elections" about what the Ukrainians actually want to solve the problems...very easy solution to the problems without having to go about the surrender crap...?

Russia won`t mind Ukraine to be independent, as long as they are not a Western puppet-state. Solution can be found pretty easy IMO if the willingness is there.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Completely false. The majority of Ukrainians wanted to be European. Even East Ukraine voted for it in every place the Rebels did not prevent voting to occur.