It's 'Vietnam All Over Again' As Defense Department Prepares to Beef Up Number of US Advisers in Ukraine

[frigidweirdo]

I'm curious to know where the logistics come from for the two month defeat of Russia?

Ukraine is not much different than Vietnam in terms of the military and political objectives announced by the US in the late1950's with Soviet and Chinese involvement with the Vietnamese. Yes, the terrain is very different but it puts Russia in the advantageous position of fighting a defensive war.

Will the US position carriers in the Adriatic Sea? The US would need overwhelming airpower to defeat the Russians in two months. That might imply air strikes on Russian soil to defeat their air force.

Yes, the Russians have good defenses, they've had time to build them. But the reason why the Ukrainians can't defeat those defenses is because they also need to hold their own defenses.

Look at WW1.

Defenses galore. The US got involved and the war ended within months. The US was putting troops on the ground in Spring 1918, it was building up and up over the summer and by November the Germans were being forced to do something because they couldn't hope to fight against everyone AND the fresh US troops and equipment.

Russia is rather precarious. It has borders all over the place, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia that are problematic. Russia simply couldn't hope to fight in the Ukraine AND deal with that. Russia couldn't fight back, because then it would lead to NATO getting involved which more doubles the troop capacity.

The US would get air superiority in terms of aircraft pretty soon. It's air force is far superior. Drones would be an issue, they always are. But the US would be able to produce drones an a rate of at least what the Russians are getting, if not much, much more. If it's willing to spend the money.

Do you know how many times Putin has basically said to the US "Please, don't get involved" but done it in the typical Russian style of "You do this, we get fucking angry, yes?"

 

[wamose]

In the end, I'm not sure China will let Russia be beat, so why the hell are we getting involved? It's a losing situation that only warmongers (neocons and Democrats) who make money off of war would like. And the more we barrow to fund other people's wars, the weaker OUR country gets. MAGA.

 

[JGalt]

The US could win in the Ukraine within months if it decided to.

If you ever decide to have that Uke flag tattoo removed from your forehead, the Mayo Clinic does a superb job, bro.

Tattoo removal - Mayo Clinic

 

[Hollie]

Yes, the Russians have good defenses, they've had time to build them. But the reason why the Ukrainians can't defeat those defenses is because they also need to hold their own defenses.

Look at WW1.

Defenses galore. The US got involved and the war ended within months. The US was putting troops on the ground in Spring 1918, it was building up and up over the summer and by November the Germans were being forced to do something because they couldn't hope to fight against everyone AND the fresh US troops and equipment.

Russia is rather precarious. It has borders all over the place, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia that are problematic. Russia simply couldn't hope to fight in the Ukraine AND deal with that. Russia couldn't fight back, because then it would lead to NATO getting involved which more doubles the troop capacity.

The US would get air superiority in terms of aircraft pretty soon. It's air force is far superior. Drones would be an issue, they always are. But the US would be able to produce drones an a rate of at least what the Russians are getting, if not much, much more. If it's willing to spend the money.

Do you know how many times Putin has basically said to the US "Please, don't get involved" but done it in the typical Russian style of "You do this, we get fucking angry, yes?"

So tell us about the logistics of this 2 month defeat of Russia. It would take months for the US to mobilize and transport men and material to Ukraine. The Russians would see this an imminent attack and might be inclined to use a tactical nuke.

The defeat of Russia is a pretty open ended goal. What does it mean? Does the US need to cross the Russian border and occupy Moscow?

 

[frigidweirdo]

So tell us about the logistics of this 2 month defeat of Russia. It would take months for the US to mobilize and transport men and material to Ukraine. The Russians would see this an imminent attack and might be inclined to use a tactical nuke.

The defeat of Russia is a pretty open ended goal. What does it mean? Does the US need to cross the Russian border and occupy Moscow?

What you want me to do a comprehensive study on the whole fucking thing, something that'd take weeks for the whole army to do.

Christ all fucking mighty.

 

[pknopp]

The US could win in the Ukraine within months if it decided to.

Win what?

 

[Hollie]

What you want me to do a comprehensive study on the whole fucking thing, something that'd take weeks for the whole army to do.

Christ all fucking mighty.

I'm curious as to defeat of Russia, really, what does that mean?

 

[sparky]

What you want me to do a comprehensive study on the whole fucking thing, something that'd take weeks for the whole army to do.

Actually all one needs know is that we've not won a war on anyone else's turf for quite some time

~S~

 

[frigidweirdo]

Win what?

Nothing, doesn't matter, go back under that rock, it's safe there.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I'm curious as to defeat of Russia, really, what does that mean?

It can mean many different things. I do not run the US government, I do not run the US military.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Actually all one needs know is that we've not won a war on anyone else's turf for quite some time

~S~

Since 2003. Then again the US hasn't really fought that many wars since 2003.

 

[pknopp]

Nothing, doesn't matter, go back under that rock, it's safe there.

Win what?

 

[22lcidw]

Since 2003. Then again the US hasn't really fought that many wars since 2003.

We are warred out. We need a period of years of recovery for our citizens.

 

[Hollie]

It can mean many different things. I do not run the US government, I do not run the US military.

Understood.

The only time the US was even close to winning the war in Vietnam was during Nixon's "Rolling Thunder". I'm not sure the US is ready to repeat that tactic over Russian cities.

I candidly have no idea what Putin would do with the deployment of 200,000? troops into Ukraine.

 

[JGalt]

So tell us about the logistics of this 2 month defeat of Russia. It would take months for the US to mobilize and transport men and material to Ukraine. The Russians would see this an imminent attack and might be inclined to use a tactical nuke.

The defeat of Russia is a pretty open ended goal. What does it mean? Does the US need to cross the Russian border and occupy Moscow?

A US incursion would only unify the Russians. They would see it as another "Battle of Stalingrad" and the results would be bloody for both sides.

 

[CrazyTrader55]

The French knew their role in Vietnam was a loser and left. The US stepped in with advisers and our involvement escalated.

The US adding advisers in Ukraine has obvious parallels to Vietnam. The Dems/ Socialists can't spend deficit money fast enough in their Ukraine flag waving frenzy. The Dems / Socialists love their foreign wars and Biden's weakness and appeasement to every totalitarian dictator and Mullocrat means the US involvement in foreign wars will continue.

It's 'Vietnam All Over Again' As Defense Department Prepares to Beef Up Number of US Advisers in Ukraine

redstate.com

The Department of Defense is considering upping the number of US military advisers stationed in Ukraine. Politico said, "The advisers would not be in a combat role, but rather would advise and support the Ukrainian government and military."

"but we are defending democracy" ROFL

 

[JGalt]

Since 2003. Then again the US hasn't really fought that many wars since 2003.

Do you really think we're ready to fight like Russians traditionally have? I can't see our American officers standing in the back of the line, shooting their own soldiers who failed to advance on the Russians.

 

[mikegriffith1]

The French knew their role in Vietnam was a loser and left. The US stepped in with advisers and our involvement escalated.

See Facts About the Vietnam War that Liberal Historians Ignore.

The US adding advisers in Ukraine has obvious parallels to Vietnam. The Dems/ Socialists can't spend deficit money fast enough in their Ukraine flag waving frenzy. The Dems / Socialists love their foreign wars and Biden's weakness and appeasement to every totalitarian dictator and Mullocrat means the US involvement in foreign wars will continue.

The Department of Defense is considering upping the number of US military advisers stationed in Ukraine. Politico said, "The advisers would not be in a combat role, but rather would advise and support the Ukrainian government and military."

Here we have another misguided pro-Russian conservative peddling the Kremlin's line about our effort to keep Russia from raping Ukraine.

The Ukrainians have already proved ten times over that they can hold their own against the Russians IF we give them adequate weapons and supplies. They don't need American ground troops in country.

They need more fighter jets so they can strike deep behind Russian lines. They also need long-range missiles so they give Moscow and St. Petersburg a taste of what Kyiv has been enduring.

 

[petro]

The US could win in the Ukraine within months if it decided to.

Pffft.
Twenty years and a trillion dollars couldn't defeat goat herders.

 

[Hollie]

See Facts About the Vietnam War that Liberal Historians Ignore.


Here we have another misguided pro-Russian conservative peddling the Kremlin's line about our effort to keep Russia from raping Ukraine.

The Ukrainians have already proved ten times over that they can hold their own against the Russians IF we give them adequate weapons and supplies. They don't need American ground troops in country.

They need more fighter jets so they can strike deep behind Russian lines. They also need long-range missiles so they give Moscow and St. Petersburg a taste of what Kyiv has been enduring.

Curiously, here we have another pro-Russian Socialist who doesn't understand history. Advisers and US military equipment were going to be all that was needed for the US train and equip the South Vietnamese. How well did that work out?

Holding their own only lasts so long as the military age of the Ukrainian population lasts.