He could easily side with us and provide his country with anything they need. At this point, I say we give Ukraine anything they need to defeat this guy short of nukes.

At this point I say we sell weapons to Ukraine at market value and let them fight it out. We make a trade agreement with whomever wins.

Why do you care what happens to Ukraine? It's not a national security interest.

No way Ukraine wins that fight if Russia wants to go all in.

samurai_science said:

---

At this point I say we sell weapons to Ukraine at market value and let them fight it out. We make a trade agreement with whomever wins.

---

Sell them to Europe when they commit 100 billion in funds to Ukraine, Ukraine "lost" all their donations

Europe is not lining up anymore to give money for some reason, oh yeah we no longer have an idiot as President. If we are not giving money, they no longer feel the need......

safety guy said:

---

No way Ukraine wins that fight if Russia wants to go all in.

---

lol. Russia has gone all in. What else do you think they aren't using?

Logos Stick said:

---

Why do you care what happens to Ukraine? It's not a national security interest.

---

The EU (USA's largest trading partner plus many of its primary NATO allies) really cares because of the massive Ukrainian refugee flow and potential new security problems this has caused for them, and thus the US really cares because of those deep trade and military relationships.A lot of stuff is geopolitically interrelated here, which is why China, North Korea, Iran, etc have also been involved helping out the other side. Giving the middle finger to Europe has never been a practical option nor would be in the best economic or security interests of the USA.

Trump continuing to help with Ukraine was part of his leverage to get that recent advantageous new trade deal with the EU. Again, a lot of stuff is interconnected.

Feel free to forward to all Isolationist types who have tried to simplify this to merely 'Russia and Ukraine's problem'. No it is not.

Pumpkinhead said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Why do you care what happens to Ukraine? It's not a national security interest.

---

Feel free to forward to all Isolationist types who have tried to simplify this to merely 'Russia and Ukraine's problem'. No it is not.

---

No, it actually is. Its easy to sell weapons to one side or the other and let Europe deal with it. We are broke

samurai_science said:

---

Pumpkinhead said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Why do you care what happens to Ukraine? It's not a national security interest.

---

Feel free to forward to all Isolationist types who have tried to simplify this to merely 'Russia and Ukraine's problem'. No it is not.

---

No, it actually is. Its easy to sell weapons to one side or the other and let Europe deal with it. We are broke

---

Or neither. Our security depends on no one else and I think its better at this point to keep our weapons to ourselves. Sell them oil, gas, sheets from Redland Cotton and pillows from Mike Lundell if they need assistance.

We need our drones and tactical nukes for the cartels.

samurai_science said:

---

Pumpkinhead said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Why do you care what happens to Ukraine? It's not a national security interest.

---

Feel free to forward to all Isolationist types who have tried to simplify this to merely 'Russia and Ukraine's problem'. No it is not.

---

No, it actually is. Its easy to sell weapons to one side or the other and let Europe deal with it. We are broke

---

Sure, if you casually dismiss that EU is our largest trading and military ally and thus f*** 'em, we don't have to give a crap and they will coming back to us regardless begging for scraps as a willing partner even though we went full Isolationist on them…you can go down that rabbit hole thinking it would be okay to do that.

But I respectfully disagree with your opinion. that has never been a realistic option for Trump and to be frank, if you were elected POTUS tomorrow and then had to deal with the entire geopolitical and global trade chessboard, it would not be a realistic option for you either. It is what it is. Isolationists will have to be mad but Europe matters.

Teslag said:

---

safety guy said:

---

No way Ukraine wins that fight if Russia wants to go all in.

---

lol. Russia has gone all in. What else do you think they aren't using?

---

They can keep going for years and basically grind Ukraine up. What would change it is if the Russian military turns on Putin.

2040huck said:

---

He could easily side with us and provide his country with anything they need. At this point, I say we give Ukraine anything they need to defeat this guy short of nukes.

---

Curious as to what Russia needs from us? Their ability to basically shake off our sanctions has been pretty well documented.

The EU is essentially an energy vassal to Russia. They have abundant natural resources and they have China.

In 2024, Russia imported roughly $300B worth of goods with 90% of that coming from Asia & EU countries.

Prior to Ukraine invasion, EU was dependent on Russia for 50% of its natural gas imports.

Sanction their oil all you want, it will just raise the price and they'll make even more money of their oil sales than they do now.

The right answer is to say screw putin and turn every valve in the permian to full send and bring down the price of energy substantially. Russia can't handle that.

It isn't called the Bloodlands for no reason. If they want to bleed, let them.

I've met a decent number of Russians, and even more Ukrainians. Haven't found many likable ones on either side.

I'd rather we spent our money on American interests.

2040huck said:

---

He could easily side with us and provide his country with anything they need. At this point, I say we give Ukraine anything they need to defeat this guy short of nukes.

---

I'd say he's more evil than an idiot. He has no concern for the lives of his country and cannot be trusted. I think going "all in" would not be in his best personal interest or he would have done it already. Honestly I hope he falls out of a window, but until then I hope Ukraine keeps wreaking havoc on them.

safety guy said:

---

No way Ukraine wins that fight if Russia wants to go all in.

---

So after 3 years and literally hundreds of thousands dead and hundreds of thousands more permanently wounded, you think they really have more they could throw at this? We can see the depletion of their armor stockpiles from space. Russia IS all in. This is all they've got to devote to this.

Pumpkinhead said:

---

samurai_science said:

---

Pumpkinhead said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Why do you care what happens to Ukraine? It's not a national security interest.

---

Feel free to forward to all Isolationist types who have tried to simplify this to merely 'Russia and Ukraine's problem'. No it is not.

---

No, it actually is. Its easy to sell weapons to one side or the other and let Europe deal with it. We are broke

---

Sure, if you casually dismiss that EU is our largest trading and military ally and thus f*** 'em, we don't have to give a crap and they will coming back to us regardless begging for scraps as a willing partner even though we went full Isolationist on them…you can go down that rabbit hole thinking it would be okay to do that.

But I respectfully disagree with your opinion. that has never been a realistic option for Trump and to be frank, if you were elected POTUS tomorrow and then had to deal with the entire geopolitical and global trade chessboard, it would not be a realistic option for you either. It is what it is. Isolationists will have to be mad but Europe matters.

---

Agreed.

Good thing Kamala is not in charge. Yikes.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

safety guy said:

---

No way Ukraine wins that fight if Russia wants to go all in.

---

So after 3 years and literally hundreds of thousands dead and hundreds of thousands more permanently wounded, you think they really have more they could throw at this? We can see the depletion of their armor stockpiles from space. Russia IS all in. This is all they've got to devote to this.

---

How do you define winning?

Russia is not giving up any territory it has taken from Ukraine. No chance.

This will end in new borders that resemble North and South Korea.

And if somehow (not happening) Ukraine actually held of and started taking territory back from Russia, Putin would probably nuke Kiev out of wounded pride alone. He's a f'ing maniac.

Sims said:

---

2040huck said:

---

He could easily side with us and provide his country with anything they need. At this point, I say we give Ukraine anything they need to defeat this guy short of nukes.

---

Curious as to what Russia needs from us? Their ability to basically shake off our sanctions has been pretty well documented.

The EU is essentially an energy vassal to Russia. They have abundant natural resources and they have China.

In 2024, Russia imported roughly $300B worth of goods with 90% of that coming from Asia & EU countries.

Prior to Ukraine invasion, EU was dependent on Russia for 50% of its natural gas imports.

Sanction their oil all you want, it will just raise the price and they'll make even more money of their oil sales than they do now.

The right answer is to say screw putin and turn every valve in the permian to full send and bring down the price of energy substantially. Russia can't handle that.

---

based on all that i have read on this topic, i would agree with your well thought out response.

Logos Stick said:

---

Why do you care what happens to Ukraine? It's not a national security interest.

---

It was a national security interest.

Now that Russia has depleted it's military capability and fighting class of citizens, it's not really a national security interest anymore.

And, I am glad that Russia didn't take Kiev. Not that I wanted America to foot the bill for the war, but I like Kiev not getting stomped immediately by Russia, if for no other reason than to show Russia is not nearly as good at offensive warfare as it is defensive warfare.

Russia forgot to follow the ironclad law that it has taught the rest of the world multiple times: never start a ground war in Asia. (or close to Asia).

Russia has chronic shortages of precision goods and instruments. They've been able to survive sanctions because of India and China, but they've been spending like crazy to do it. They're also becoming heavily dependent on the Chinese for many goods as well as currency and financing. Their currency reserves and a lot of their trading is basically becoming tied to the yuan.

On top of that, they've been seeing inflation over 9% for some time. According to some sources they're getting that down to a target of closer to 4.5%-5%, but at the cost of economic growth. Their economy is expected to grow by only 1% this year. That's not something that can be kept up indefinitely.

Europe has been ending their reliance on Russian gas and oil. Only 15% of their gas imports will come from Russia this year, and they are following a phase out plan to end all Russian gas imports by 2027. Russian crude oil now accounts for less than 5% of European imports. They are not an energy vassal to Russia, and it's unlikely they ever will be again. Russia has basically shut that door on themselves. The biggest buyers of Russian oil and gas are China, India, and Turkey.

For Russia, that's a dangerous position strategically because they're becoming dependent on China as a buyer. China is basically using Russia's economy by the balls.

Selling a ton of oil and dropping prices would also hurt American producers. There's also the possibility that China simply buys up a lot of the excess to prop up Russia.

Teslag said:

---

safety guy said:

---

No way Ukraine wins that fight if Russia wants to go all in.

---

lol. Russia has gone all in. What else do you think they aren't using?

---

Nuclear weapons?

BusterAg said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Why do you care what happens to Ukraine? It's not a national security interest.

---

It was a national security interest.

Now that Russia has depleted it's military capability and fighting class of citizens, it's not really a national security interest anymore.

And, I am glad that Russia didn't take Kiev. Not that I wanted America to foot the bill for the war, but I like Kiev not getting stomped immediately by Russia, if for no other reason than to show Russia is not nearly as good at offensive warfare as it is defensive warfare.

Russia forgot to follow the ironclad law that it has taught the rest of the world multiple times: never start a ground war in Asia. (or close to Asia).

---

Never attack on too many fronts
Never send in armor unprotected etc. etc.

There's a lot of things Russia forgot from it's previous wars.

Russia was never a national security threat. They proved that with their flaccid attack on road apple Ukraine which is a failure by any measure.

Urban Ag said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

safety guy said:

---

No way Ukraine wins that fight if Russia wants to go all in.

---

So after 3 years and literally hundreds of thousands dead and hundreds of thousands more permanently wounded, you think they really have more they could throw at this? We can see the depletion of their armor stockpiles from space. Russia IS all in. This is all they've got to devote to this.

---

How do you define winning?

Russia is not giving up any territory it has taken from Ukraine. No chance.

This will end in new borders that resemble North and South Korea.

And if somehow (not happening) Ukraine actually held of and started taking territory back from Russia, Putin would probably nuke Kiev out of wounded pride alone. He's a f'ing maniac.

---

If Russia fails to take Ukraine, which was their goal at the outset and would presumably be their goal, "if they went all in," then Ukraine has won that fight because Russia has failed to achieve their goal and presumably depleted their forces and continued ability to make war. Whether Ukraine can take back territory is irrelevant because Russia would presumably not be able to take any more.

That said, the entire point was that Russia has gone all in, or as much as they realistically can. They've weakened strategic positions in the East, around Kaliningrad, and near countries like Finland in order to keep up operations in Ukraine. The equivalent for us would be fighting in Afghanistan or something and becoming so strapped that we pulled tanks and other armor from quick reaction forces in Europe and air defenses from South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan.

Logos Stick said:

---

Russia was never a national security threat. They proved that with their flaccid attack on road apple Ukraine which is a failure by any measure.

---

Hindsight is 20/20

We lost the war in Ukraine. Russia will end up with the areas taken. We said no annexation and there will be annexation. We lost.

deddog said:

---

Teslag said:

---

safety guy said:

---

No way Ukraine wins that fight if Russia wants to go all in.

---

lol. Russia has gone all in. What else do you think they aren't using?

---

Nuclear weapons?

---

Russia using nukes isn't going all in. It's announcing to the world that they've lost and no longer want to be a sovereign nation.

The only outcome for Russia using nukes is that it becomes a lawless wasteland after NATO/US retaliation. It's not a viable military option for them.

safety guy said:

---

Teslag said:

---

safety guy said:

---

No way Ukraine wins that fight if Russia wants to go all in.

---

lol. Russia has gone all in. What else do you think they aren't using?

---

They can keep going for years and basically grind Ukraine up. What would change it is if the Russian military turns on Putin.

---

In 3 years they've gained virtually no ground. What difference will years make?

deddog said:

---

Teslag said:

---

safety guy said:

---

No way Ukraine wins that fight if Russia wants to go all in.

---

lol. Russia has gone all in. What else do you think they aren't using?

---

Nuclear weapons?

---

So Russia is going to liberate ethnic Russians by…



vaporizing them?

Queso1 said:

---

We lost the war in Ukraine. Russia will end up with the areas taken. We said no annexation and there will be annexation. We lost.

---

Except Russia didn't want just what they have. They wanted all of Ukraine, regime change, and to do it in days or weeks with minimal losses.

They completely failed to meet their objectives and now have a decimated military.

Queso1 said:

---

We lost the war in Ukraine. Russia will end up with the areas taken. We said no annexation and there will be annexation. We lost.

---

We aren't in a war in Ukraine.

Teslag said:

---

Queso1 said:

---

We lost the war in Ukraine. Russia will end up with the areas taken. We said no annexation and there will be annexation. We lost.

---

Except Russia didn't want just what they have. They wanted all of Ukraine, regime change, and to do it in days or weeks with minimal losses.

They completely failed to meet their objectives and now have a decimated military.

---

Russia got Crimea about a 1/3 of UKE how is that not anything but success for Russia?

Quote:

---

They completely failed to meet their objectives and now have a decimated military.

---

Really how they still bombing the **** out of UKE and not in jeopardy of losing any of their gains?

2040huck said:

---

He could easily side with us and provide his country with anything they need. At this point, I say we give Ukraine anything they need to defeat this guy short of nukes.

---

People are way more complicated than that, and geopolitics are even more complicated.

The only thing the USA can do imo is Man up, and respond to foreign actors with calculated moves towards peace, untill that no longer becomes possible or feasible. Then it's war.