As I was trying to think of something else besides Roe v. Wade, it occurred to me this afternoon to wonder how long the Ukraine war was likely to last. We fought the Soviet Union as proxies in Vietnam for about a decade. We fought them as proxies in Afghanistan for five or six years. Now we're fighting them as proxies in Ukraine, and the harder we (and NATO) fight the longer the war is likely to drag out. This is especially true since this time the Russians are actually fighting instead of simply supplying their clients, and it's become clear that the Russian army is sorely incompetent.
On the other hand, the Russian objective seems to have shrunk considerably, so that should speed things up. But on the other other hand, the Ukrainians seem willing to fight for the Donbas pretty competently for approximately forever (eight years and counting at the moment).
But there are more hands in this argument than an octopus could handle. I've read dozens of reasons on both sides why this war could end fairly quickly or could turn into a long stalemate. And we'd be supplying weapons and sanctioning Russia the whole time.
My view of Russia is a pretty conventional one: I have nothing against the Russian people, and don't really blame them for being angry about how we handled economic reform in the 1990s and then pushed NATO almost to their new borders. Vladimir Putin, on the other hand, is just a thug. Even leaving his territorial ambitions aside, he just has no redeeming qualities.
So how long would we be happy fighting him? A year? Sure. Two years? Probably. Three? Four? More? We just finished up fighting two far more expensive wars that lasted more than a decade, so I suppose we could go at least that long in Ukraine.
But will we? Will Russia? Are we in for another forever war? Comments?
I have recently listened to several podcasts that thought the conflict could be headed towards the use of tactical nukes in Ukraine. They were very disquieting. For example, The Rachman Review, 'Putin's nuclear threat...'. Vox conversations. Others, I can't find them at the moment. Wondering what Kevin thinks of the likelihood of this risk. Especially as Biden seems to be intent on a more direct confrontation.
i'm sure somebody has already pointed this out, but there's a pretty big difference between having boots on the ground and not, and, "advisors" aside, we currently do not have boots on the ground in Ukraine at the present moment, which makes it pretty clearly categorically different from Iraq and Afghanistan.
How about we fight until Ukraine and we win?
What is it about the left that they start looking for surrender options as soon as we or our allies get attacked?!?!
Well, I wouldnt call Keven even vaguely of the left, but otherwise I completely agree.
Let's get real. He's on the left side of our 50/50 nation.
When he starts saying he will consider voting for a Republican presidential candidate then we can talk.
In order to even consider voting for any candidate nominated by the current incarnation of the Republican Party, you need to be not just right-wing, but lunatic fringe right-wing.
We aren't fighting at all. We haven't been, aren't, and won't (unless Putin goes absolutely nuts and attacks NATO).
The Ukrainians are fighting, and it's up to them to decide when or if they want to quit. So far, they seem disinclined. All we have to decide--and all we *get* to decide--is whether we want to continue to support them. I can't imagine why we'd stop.
Apparently, if we listen to people like Kevin Drum, we will stop because we get tired of helping the Ukrainians fight for freedom against a genocidal expansionist fascist regime.
Kevin is asking whether Americans will tolerate it. While we can spend money on it, as a people we generally tire of such things. Get bored. And then stop.
This is profoundly disappointing. We aren't fighting Russia. We're providing some weapons for someone else to. It's just money, and really not that much of it , compared to, say, the DoD budget.
The war will continue until either Ukraine gives up, or Russia does. So it could be a while.
As for us, we aren't fighting at all. We're just shipping hardware to the Ukrainians and providing intel. I see no reason why we would stop. So, I expect we won't. Probably won't let up on sanctions, either.
That uniquely Russian command structure has made itself a perfect target. Moving around helps, but they're still getting picked off. By the end of the war, whenever that is, the Russian military will be decimated and generationally incapable of going to war.
It's noteworthy that the US is openly talking about this. Everything this administration has been doing since December has been deliberate and calculated. They learned a lot of lessons from their pullout of Afghanistan.
As we watch the war, it seems the Russians are constantly trying to resolve their way around their stalling effort, but to no effect. They are always one step behind. Maybe missing Gerasimov wasn't a failure; maybe it was a planned miss that effectively took out the leadership just below Gerasimov, meant to target Putin's paranoia.
I think "Putin is a thug," while true, severely understates the gravity of this situation. Putin and trump are two jaws of a vise that threatens to crush any semblance of liberal democracy on this planet. They are also the most heinous of all petrostates (yes, worse than the Saudis) and the only major country that stands to benefit from climate change. I hate to get on board with the neocons, but in this case I think they are right that Putin has to be defeated at any cost. If he were to eliminate Ukraine (imperfect as it is) as a sovereign nation, we are in for a century of horrors to follow.
As for how long this will drag out, I am predicting no more than a month. Putin will either find a way to finesse a withdrawal (e.g., "We killed all the Nazis!") or be toppled from within Russia.
Looks like Ukraine has successfully hit another Russian Black Sea fleet ship, Admiral Makarov.
The right question: How much longer can Russia afford to keep this war of attrition going?
These equipment losses are significant and mounting. They will have long-lasting effects -- exactly what the west wants -- preventing Russia from launching new offensives at its neighbors and possibly blocking them from the break-apart of the Russian Federation.
Some would argue that 2002-03 Iraq War proponent Kevin Drum is just showing the necessary hesitance at another protracted foreign entanglement for which the US has no obvious motivation after being wrong about Iraq, but really, it's just an Orange County GQPer opposing a military intervention when a Democrat does it after supporting similar when a Republican did it.
There you go.