What should U.S. policy be towards the Ukraine conflict?

[Nova78]

What should U.S. policy be towards the Ukraine conflict?​

IN BIDEN WORLD

 

[rightwinger]

Here is my suggestion for U.S. policy towards the Ukraine conflict:
1. Offer Russia a cease fire agreement. If they agree, we will stop further military aid to Ukraine and will oppose its membership in NATO.
2. If Russia does not agree, we will start placing nuclear missiles all along its borders with NATO countries.

What say you?

So we declare Russian victory and award them all captured territory while stripping Ukraines ability to fight back.

 

[jwoodie]

Tell Europe to handle it

Do you mean the EU or European NATO members?

P.S. Did you move this thread on U.S. Policy (i.e, Politics) to General Global Topics? If so, why?

 

[jwoodie]

Umm, no.

Umm, yes.

To prevent Russia from winning and looping in more nations to assist. Taiwan is next, so this is only a precursor test IMO.

 

[Anathema]

And stop all supply of military material and demand Ukraine seek peace talks

NO involvement. No support of any kind. No interference. It’s not our problem, let them handle it beteeen themselves (militarily or diplomatically)

 

[the watcher]

Let Ukraine join the UN if they want to. Get our ass out of the UN, NATO, and quit pretending everytime we start shit it's about freedom and not protecting corporate interests.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Right directly to the point on America needing another pushover.

And to the point on the reason why Putin is so hated and demonized by America, while being honoured by over 95% of the Russian people.

Vlad's Nads Give Soyboys the Sads

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

You're advocating the ongoing slaughter of the Ukrainian people. That can only result in a fight to the last standing ukrainian.

And stop all supply of military material and demand Ukraine seek peace talks.

Nobody here is “advocating the ongoing slaughter of the Ukrainian people.” That is unworthy defeatist pro-Putin propaganda. Most everybody wants this terrible war to end. But how? With what result?

I feared the situation was drifting toward disaster since the “Maidan Revolution” — which was enthusiastically welcomed in the West and hated by “Great Russian nationalists” and Russian oligarchs who feared they were losing their power over Ukraine. As popular as it was in Kiev and most — but not all — of the country, it doomed the possibility that Ukraine could be a successful binational neutral state — something rightwingers here who hate “multiculturalism” normally say is unworkable in the U.S. or anywhere.

Putin’s response to the Maidan Revolution, especially his invasion of 2022, made it clear to all Ukrainian nationalists, including many or most Russian native speakers (Zelensky is one such!) that Russia’s aggression had to be defeated once and for all. Putin in 2022 decided to destroy Ukraine as an independent nation with a democratic pro-Western government.

That was then. The U.S. and Europe has not been wrong in helping the Ukrainian gov’t resist Putin’s bloody invasion. A decisive victory of one side or the other, however, is not inevitable. If the war remains deadlocked for long near the present front lines, then negotiations will become possible, the fighting could die down, missile attacks can slow, and a temporary cease fire be implemented.

Ukrainian optimism about its ability to regain all lands taken by Russia in 2022, let alone Crimea, is faltering. So is confidence in the West. Russia almost saw Putin overthrown, and there is no certainty Russia will even remain a unified state, let alone conquer much more of Ukraine.

All talk about sending U.S. or NATO troops into battle should be opposed, as should talk about stopping all assistance to Ukraine. But as opportunities arise, Ukraine, NATO & Russia will probably all need to agree to trade “land for peace.”

 

[gipper]

Nobody here is “advocating the ongoing slaughter of the Ukrainian people.” That is unworthy defeatist pro-Putin propaganda. Most everybody wants this terrible war to end. But how? With what result?

I feared the situation was drifting toward disaster since the “Maidan Revolution” — which was enthusiastically welcomed in the West and hated by “Great Russian nationalists” and Russian oligarchs who feared they were losing their power over Ukraine. As popular as it was in Kiev and most — but not all — of the country, it doomed the possibility that Ukraine could be a successful binational neutral state — something rightwingers here who hate “multiculturalism” normally say is unworkable in the U.S. or anywhere.

Putin’s response to the Maidan Revolution, especially his invasion of 2022, made it clear to all Ukrainian nationalists, including many or most Russian native speakers (Zelensky is one such!) that Russia’s aggression had to be defeated once and for all. Putin in 2022 decided to destroy Ukraine as an independent nation with a democratic pro-Western government.

That was then. The U.S. and Europe has not been wrong in helping the Ukrainian gov’t resist Putin’s bloody invasion. A decisive victory of one side or the other, however, is not inevitable. If the war remains deadlocked for long near the present front lines, then negotiations will become possible, the fighting could die down, missile attacks can slow, and a temporary cease fire be implemented.

Ukrainian optimism about its ability to regain all lands taken by Russia in 2022, let alone Crimea, is faltering. So is confidence in the West. Russia almost saw Putin overthrown, and there is no certainty Russia will even remain a unified state, let alone conquer much more of Ukraine.

All talk about sending U.S. or NATO troops into battle should be opposed, as should talk about stopping all assistance to Ukraine. But as opportunities arise, Ukraine, NATO & Russia will probably all need to agree to trade “land for peace.”

You missed a few things.

Had O, Nuland, and company not overthrown the duly elected government in 2014 and then supported Ukraine attacking and killing 14k in the Donbas, and then undermining the Minsk Accords, this war never happens.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

You missed a few things.

Had O, Nuland, and company not overthrown the duly elected government in 2014 and then supported Ukraine attacking and killing 14k in the Donbas, and then undermining the Minsk Accords, this war never happens.

As you know I have discussed the reality (not your misrepresentation) of all those events elsewhere at length and in detail.

The U.S. did not itself overthrow the Ukrainian government in 2014. That is Russian propaganda. The Ukrainian nationalist Maidan movement in Kiev was a popular rebellion in Kiev that overthrew a corrupt (but previously elected) regime, and iirc even a majority of the regime’s own parliamentary party joined shortly afterward in denouncing the ex-President Victor Yanukovych, who fled to Russia, and voted that he was no longer President.

Similarly, the death of over 10,000 fighters and civilians in the Donbass region over 8 years after 2014 was a tragedy, but that number includes fighters and civilians on both sides. Without actual Russian military and private mercenary soldiers sent from Russia to help and ultimately direct the Ukrainian pro-Russian secessionists there, the fighting would have ended by 2015 with a complete re-establishment of Ukrainian state power. There would have been no “massacres” in that case, either.

I agree the Minsk Accords represented the best possible basis for a negotiated settlement after 2014, and Zelensky himself — elected as a “peace candidate” — was seeking to use them to work out a peace deal, but it was the Ukrainian military that opposed this idea and prevented their being adopted. It is hardly certain that even with an accord agreement the war in Donbass would have ended and the Russian invasion of 2022 been prevented.

There is plenty more I left out here, and plenty of blame to go around. The U.S. is no “innocent” in this matter, nor did it always show good judgement or try to keep Ukraine neutral over the last 30 years, but it is not the invader of a sovereign country here either.

 

[gipper]

As you know I have discussed the reality (not your misrepresentation) of all those events elsewhere at length and in detail.

The U.S. did not itself overthrow the Ukrainian government in 2014. That is Russian propaganda. The Ukrainian nationalist Maidan movement in Kiev was a popular rebellion in Kiev that overthrew a corrupt (but previously elected) regime, and iirc even a majority of the regime’s own parliamentary party joined shortly afterward in denouncing the ex-President Victor Yanukovych, who fled to Russia, and voted that he was no longer President.

Similarly, the death of over 10,000 fighters and civilians in the Donbass region over 8 years after 2014 was a tragedy, but that number includes fighters and civilians on both sides. Without actual Russian military and private mercenary soldiers sent from Russia to help and ultimately direct the Ukrainian pro-Russian secessionists there, the fighting would have ended by 2015 with a complete re-establishment of Ukrainian state power. There would have no “massacres” in that case, either.

I agree the Minsk Accords represented the best possible basis for a negotiated settlement after 2014, and Zelensky himself — elected as a “peace candidate” — was seeking to use them to work out a peace deal, but it was the Ukrainian military that opposed this idea and prevented their being adopted. It is hardly certain that even with an accord agreement the war in Donbass would have ended and the Russian invasion of 2022 been prevented.

There is plenty more I left out here, and plenty of blame to go around. The U.S. is no “innocent” in this matter, nor did it always show good judgement or try to keep Ukraine neutral over the last 30 years, but it is not the invader of a sovereign country here either.

Okay but had the US not supported and helped to foment the revolution, it doesn’t happen. Secondly, had the US used its power to stop the killing in the Donbas it stops. Thirdly, had the US supported rather than undermined Minsk Z signs a peace treaty. Fourthly, had the US not supplied massive wesponry the war ends. And had the US said no NATO for Ukraine, war is avoided.

Clearly the USG wanted this war.

 

[Nobody911]

Here is my suggestion for U.S. policy towards the Ukraine conflict:
1. Offer Russia a cease fire agreement. If they agree, we will stop further military aid to Ukraine and will oppose its membership in NATO.
2. If Russia does not agree, we will start placing nuclear missiles all along its borders with NATO countries.

What say you?

Who benefited greatly from the Ukraine conflict?

The Ukraine conflict has been a complex and multifaceted issue, and different stakeholders have benefited in various ways. It is essential to note that this answer is not comprehensive, as the conflict involves many players with diverse goals and interests. Some key beneficiaries include:

1. Russia: The conflict has allowed Russia to project power and influence in the region. Annexing Crimea in 2014 and supporting separatist movements in Eastern Ukraine has increased Russia's control and strategic position, particularly in the Black Sea region. It has also enabled Russia to maintain influence over Ukraine, limiting its prospects for joining Western institutions such as NATO or the EU.

2. Ukrainian separatists: Pro-Russian separatist groups in Eastern Ukraine have gained territories and established quasi-independent regions, which gives them greater autonomy. These groups, supported by Russia, have benefited politically and possibly economically from the conflict.

3. Military-industrial complexes: The conflict has provided opportunities for arms manufacturers and suppliers, as both Ukraine and Russia have increased their military expenditure in response to the conflict. This benefits defense contractors and arms-producing countries.

4. Regional powers: Some regional powers have benefited from the conflict as it diverts attention and resources of the involved parties. It allows them to pursue their own interests, expand their influence, or address internal issues with less external interference.

5. Energy suppliers: The conflict has disrupted natural gas supplies and transit routes in the region, creating uncertainties and price fluctuations. Certain energy suppliers may have benefited from this volatility, as they could potentially take advantage of the situation to offer alternative energy sources or increase their market share.

It is crucial to keep in mind that while some parties may benefit from the conflict, overall, the conflict has had severe humanitarian and economic consequences for Ukraine and its people.

Do you think Americans themselves benefited enormously from the foreign policy? They're fully aware of it! lol.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Clearly the USG wanted this war.

This is not only not “clear” but outright wrong. The U.S. did not want Putin to invade, and the U.S. afterwards did not even expect the Ukrainians to succeed in holding onto Kiev.

The Ukrainians proved competent and determined to fight, stabilized their control in Kiev, and then took back Kharkiv, the Russians too reorganized their occupation forces in the South and Donbass. Now that Putin’s 3-day police action has become a bloody regular war of aggression, the U.S. wants the Ukrainians to win … but is aware that it may not be able to retake all its territory.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Here is my suggestion for U.S. policy towards the Ukraine conflict:
1. Offer Russia a cease fire agreement. If they agree, we will stop further military aid to Ukraine and will oppose its membership in NATO.
2. If Russia does not agree, we will start placing nuclear missiles all along its borders with NATO countries.

What say you?

FUCK UKRAINE…let them all die.
Spend the billions on our needy Veterans, on trying to improve negroes and on eradicating every single illegal alien AND THEIR SPAWN from our nation.

Unkotare

 

[BrokeLoser]

Do you mean the EU or European NATO members?

P.S. Did you move this thread on U.S. Policy (i.e, Politics) to General Global Topics? If so, why?

It was moved because the topic hurt someone’s feelings… The same reason they are almost all moved.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

What should U.S. policy be towards the Ukraine conflict?

It's no our fight.

It's not our business.

We should stay out of it.

We should not be expending any American resources to help either side in that fight, that could be better spent for the benefit of the American people.

We certainly should not even think of sending Americans to fight and die in that war.

 

[Markle]

Here is my suggestion for U.S. policy towards the Ukraine conflict:
1. Offer Russia a cease fire agreement. If they agree, we will stop further military aid to Ukraine and will oppose its membership in NATO.
2. If Russia does not agree, we will start placing nuclear missiles all along its borders with NATO countries.

What say you?

Isn't this about three years too late?

 

[Markle]

None of the above. We keep assisting Ukraine as we are doing as long as they have the will to fight.

Do you mean 20 years, as in Vietnam and Afghanistan?

Or, until we run out of money?

 

[Markle]

So Russia is going to attack Taiwan?

China has been given the green light to take Taiwan just as President Biden also gave the green light to President Putin to invade Ukraine.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

FUCK UKRAINE…let them all die.
Spend the billions on our needy Veterans, on trying to improve negroes and on eradicating every single illegal alien AND THEIR SPAWN from our nation.

It's one of those situations that has me wishing both sides could lose; that it was a realistic outcome for the Russians and the Ukrainians to wipe each other out almost completely. Or, perhaps, decide to comes to some peaceful resolution of their conflict, as an alternative to wiping out both their populations.

But in any event, American resources need to be used to the benefit of Americans, and not to support either side in this foreign war.