what is the lefts plan to end the war in Ukraine ?

[martybegan]

My point. At some point the cost of maintaining an offensive reaches breaking point. I don't know if in this case the Ukranians or Russians will break first. But neither do you. So, I see no reason to pressure Ukraine to give up their fight for freedom until THEY decide they want to give up. At the moment the US is trying to force them to give up.

I see the Ukrainian's assets breaking first, not their will.

 

[forkup]

I see the Ukrainian's assets breaking first, not their will.

That's why you supply all the assets you can. Not halt them to force them to the negotiation table.

 

[martybegan]

That's why you supply all the assets you can. Not halt them to force them to the negotiation table.

Overall assets, including manpower, and more importantly, people trained to properly use whatever they are being supplied with.

 

[Mac-7]

So you think that having to spend an extra 2 to 3 percent on defense would be insurmountable "deprivation", as I said Europe had its social security during the cold war. With a defense spending of 4 on defense.

If it were easy it would have happened years ago

You may think the Euros have money to burn but it aint so

 

[forkup]

If it were easy it would have happened years ago

You may think the Euros have money to burn but it aint so

Nobody says anything about money to burn. I'm in Europe atm, I'm under no illusions. But for Europe the question is necessity. We understand that Putin isn't going to stop. And so, we better get ready.

 

[Mac-7]

Nobody says anything about money to burn. I'm in Europe atm, I'm under no illusions. But for Europe the question is necessity. We understand that Putin isn't going to stop. And so, we better get ready.

Sure putin might attack again someday

But whats not to like about a cease-fire now?

 

[forkup]

Sure putin might attack again someday

But whats not to like about a cease-fire now?

Because it gives Putin what he wants and gives him a stronger economic base. All of which I would be fine with if Ukraine wanted to give up. Here they are being forced.

 

[Mac-7]

Because it gives Putin what he wants and gives him a stronger economic base. All of which I would be fine with if Ukraine wanted to give up. Here they are being forced.

You make a lot of assumptions that have not happened yet

The russians are economically incompetent, and their share of the mineral wealth may be smaller than you imagine

 

[forkup]

You make a lot of assumptions that have not happened yet

The russians are economically incompetent, and their share of the mineral wealth may be smaller than you imagine

I know my history. Both recent and ancient. Nothing tells me that anything good comes out of appeasing a dictator with territorial ambition. This is his third time. Three strikes and you're out.

And it's not just minerals it's port access, grain, etc. etc. all of which can be leveraged for further aggression.

 

[forkup]

You make a lot of assumptions that have not happened yet

The russians are economically incompetent, and their share of the mineral wealth may be smaller than you imagine

It's funny though. Here you are arguing that Russians are "economically incompetent", while at the same time arguing that Ukraine have no chance and should just give up.

Tad contradictory don't you think?

 

[Mac-7]

I know my history. Both recent and ancient. Nothing tells me that anything good comes out of appeasing a dictator with territorial ambition. This is his third time. Three strikes and you're out.

And it's not just minerals it's port access, grain, etc. etc. all of which can be leveraged for further aggression.

I think Odessa will remain in Ukraine

As for how much territory Ukraine will lose will remain to be seen

Territory btw that the Ukes have already lost

 

[forkup]

I think Odessa will remain in Ukraine

As for how much territory Ukraine will lose will remain to be seen

Territory btw that the Ukes have already lost

And territory they are prepared to fight for.

 

[Mac-7]

It's funny though. Here you are arguing that Russians are "economically incompetent", while at the same time arguing that Ukraine have no chance and should just give up.

Tad contradictory don't you think?

Not if you understand that the russians do not have to be an economic powerhouse to continue the war

But here is a ray of hope for you

If putin is hurting as much as you claim then trump will get a better deal than you give him credit for

 

[Edgetho]

Where did you dream up this fantasy? The Marine Corps was formed a month after the Navy was created in 1775. The British have had Marines since time began.

And the Greeks, Persians and Romans before then. Naval Infantry.

Marines aren't supposed to do the jobs of the Army in our Order of Battle. The Army is the Senior Service and all other Services, at this time, exist only to support the Army.

In 1775, Navy Ships lashed together with the enemy during a Sea Battle and commenced to beat the shit out of each other and slash or stab each other until one or the other gave up. That's what Marines were for. Sometimes they'd have Sailors in the rigging as snipers but they were good for one shot only. (Try reloading a muzzle-loader while friggin in the riggin).

And oh, idiot 'historians' say that the Brits used smaller ships to defeat the Spanish Armada in 1588. Horse manure. In those days, Navies had YUGE guns that were loaded before they left home port, engaged the enemy and were then incapable of re-loading at Sea. Too big, too cumbersome. The Brits used smaller guns capable of being re-loaded at Sea and shot the shit out of the Spanish when they tried to lash-off and board. Academics..... More like dumbasses.

I'm not knocking the Marines. People just gotta understand, they are not the main fighting force of the United States on the ground. They just aren't. There have been major 'battles' over that since their inception. The Army, rightly, sees them as redundant and, sometimes, an impediment. The Navy sees them as indispensable. They don't like Army Generals telling them what to do, how to handle their ships, where to place them and when a Beach Landing is involved, telling them how to handle that.

The Marines have always had to fight for their very existence. They were disbanded for a long time back in the day. So they've always tried to prove they could 'Do More With Less' which often led to their Alligator mouths over-loading their Canary asses (no offense intended). Again, no knock on the average Marine but on their Higher-ups who learned their Land Warfare at -- Annapolis!

The Marines have their place in our Order of Battle. An important one but there's nothing they can do that the Army can't do. And that's what bothers them. In fact, I believe the Army made more Beach Landings in WW2 than the Marines. Normandy, Sicily, and I think The Philippines, Okinawa had some Marines but it was mostly Army and under Army control. MacArthur used mostly Army for his multiple Beach landings in WW2.

IOW, the Marines could disappear tomorrow and we wouldn't even notice. Specialized Army Unites could take their place. But it would suck for morale

We also use them as the Country's Gendarme. If some pip-squeak country is acting up, we can send in some Marines and nobody gets too excited about it. It's like, "Oh, it's just some Marines " But if we send in the Army, people get nervous.

There is so much wrong in that post, I don't know where to begin.

Marines make headlines.

The Army makes History

Anything else I can help you with?

 

[Zavulon]

Who says they can't.

The Afghans did, with a lot less than what Ukraine has to work with.

For both Russia and America Afghanistan isn't a vital threat. But Ukraine is not Russian "Afghanistan". Ukraine is Russian "Confederacy". The woe is of the same culture and language, and both sides clearly understand what they are fighting for.

The Russians are not ten feet tall and eat iron for breakfast. They are largely scared dudes in museum grade tanks hoping to not get killed.

As if they were ten feet tall when they destroyed armies of United Europe lead by Hitler and Napoleon.

 

[MisterBeale]

what is the lefts plan to end the war in Ukraine ?​

 

[JoeB131]

For a private. who then gets taught by their NCO's and then further training as they go up the chain.

I want Ukraine to win, I just don't see how it happens without direct European intervention.

And looking at the status of Europe's armies, I doubt that might even work.

Netherlands has 3 BRIGADES.

Belgium has the equivalent of 12 BATTALIONS.

France and Germany may be better off, but not much.

And the Poles would have to keep a substantial amount of their forces on their own border, same for the Baltic Countries.

How do you think they found NCO's during WW2?

When the Army went from 190,000 soldiers in 1940 to 8 million by 1945.

They found some junior soldiers who showed promise and slapped stripes on them.

 

[DonGlock26]

But they never brought the tanks ashore in an amphibious assault. That is my point. Why not bring in Army tanks when needed just like they do with the Marine's tanks?

That is incorrect. The USMC had tanks even at the beginning of the Battle for Guadalcanal.

On Tarawa:

Tarawa on the Web

And at Saipan.

The submerged Sherman tanks of Saipan – WW2Wrecks.com

www.ww2wrecks.com

 

[yidnar]

What about any of Trump's actions makes you believe he will stand against Russian further expansion?

he's the one that sanctioned the crap out of Russia and demanded that NATO spend more on defense and he sent anti tank and armor weapons to Ukraine when Obama sent blankets .. he also scolded the EU countries for buying oil and gas from Russia and he shut down Russias Nord Tream 2 pipeline !

Trump blocks Putin’s pipeline with US sanctions

Only weeks away from completion, new US sanctions force Nord Stream 2 contractor to down tools.

www.atlanticcouncil.org

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

That is incorrect. The USMC had tanks even at the beginning of the Battle for Guadalcanal.


View attachment 1085951



On Tarawa:


View attachment 1085948

Tarawa on the Web

And at Saipan.
View attachment 1085944

The submerged Sherman tanks of Saipan – WW2Wrecks.com

www.ww2wrecks.com

I knew that. I was referring to the modern era in the recent activities by the Marines.