Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[KevinB]

Except that Biden can’t just force the House and Senate to approve things. The US-style “checks and balances” form of govt works until it doesn’t, and one person (like Tuberville) can bring everything to a grinding halt.

POTUS had a slew of money left over (near 6B) and sat on it, as well as sitting on lend-lease material that he could have authorized.

Jake Sullivan is the biggest villain as he’s a nervous Nelly and constantly worried about escalating things.

 

[MilEME09]

POTUS had a slew of money left over (near 6B) and sat on it, as well as sitting on lend-lease material that he could have authorized.

Jake Sullivan is the biggest villain as he’s a nervous Nelly and constantly worried about escalating things.

Lend lease expired and got stripped out of the NDAA for the 24/25 fiscal budget.

 

[KevinB]

Lend lease expired and got stripped out of the NDAA for the 24/25 fiscal budget.

My point was that it could have been used and wasn’t, and 6B of remaining authority for DrawDown existed.

That’s on one person- POTUS, for listening to Jake Sullivan and his concerns about escalating the situation. The same assclown that insisted that targeting Russia was ATACMS was a bad idea and not to be done.

 

[Kirkhill]

The same names have been coming up since 2013 counselling the same course of action:

Don't make Vlad angry.

Disregard those silly guarantees Ukraine was given in Budapest.

Don't give Ukraine those Javelins to defend against Vlad's tanks.

Don't upset Frau Merkel's natural gas supply.

Maybe we don't have to act at all if Vlad just uses the tip and takes a little bit.

And pray those northerners don't force our hand and make us supply tanks, long range missiles, fighters, air defenses and nuclear guarantees like Johnson gave to Sweden and Finland ...

Trump couldn't screw things up more than the Obama-Biden State Department has if he was trying.

Eedjits.

 

[MilEME09]

My point was that it could have been used and wasn’t, and 6B of remaining authority for DrawDown existed.

That’s on one person- POTUS, for listening to Jake Sullivan and his concerns about escalating the situation. The same assclown that insisted that targeting Russia was ATACMS was a bad idea and not to be done.

Yeah I am 50% on the fence if Sullivan is a russian asset. Two major russian airbases with Su-34 squadrons are within range but inside russia. This would be a vastly different war if you took two fighter-bomber regiments off the table.

 

[KevinB]

Yeah I am 50% on the fence if Sullivan is a russian asset. Two major russian airbases with Su-34 squadrons are within range but inside russia. This would be a vastly different war if you took two fighter-bomber regiments off the table.

I don’t think he’s that. He is just a hand wringing Pussy.

 

[OldSolduer]

I don’t think he’s that. He is just a hand wringing Pussy.

Useful fool. Or idjut or both

Both I think

 

[suffolkowner]

I struggle to see the Biden/Sullivan plan on Ukraine-Russia. Whats the electoral benefit? Whats the benefit with regards to China? Everything that happens in Russia will be the result of internal factors, that may have a momentum of their own. If Putin unilaterally pulled out of Ukraine he would just tell everyday Russians that he defeated NATO and saved Russia from invasion.

 

[ueo]

I struggle to see the Biden/Sullivan plan on Ukraine-Russia. Whats the electoral benefit? Whats the benefit with regards to China? Everything that happens in Russia will be the result of internal factors, that may have a momentum of their own. If Putin unilaterally pulled out of Ukraine he would just tell everyday Russians that he defeated NATO and saved Russia from invasion.

However, winners write history. What ever is for home consumption usually diverges from ground truth. See germany about '17 or '18 or so.

 

[KevinB]

I struggle to see the Biden/Sullivan plan on Ukraine-Russia.

I believe Sullivan thinks that Russia will just eventually go home.

Whats the electoral benefit?

Zero, Sullivan is concerned about Russian nuclear weapons, both from a Russian preemptive strike, or from a Russian collapse. So he believes in a longer protracted war where Russia simply gives up and goes home. I don’t think he understands 1) Putin isn’t going to do that without being resoundingly defeated 2) America likes to win, so a “tie” isn’t going to be palatable.

Whats the benefit with regards to China?

Folks like Sullivan believe China will be deterred from aggression due to seeing the Western unity and Russian losses. However I think China sees that western resolve is fairly lukewarm. While Western missiles etc are a concern for China, the fact is if they are willing to bear the casualties, they can most likely prevail.

Everything that happens in Russia will be the result of internal factors, that may have a momentum of their own. If Putin unilaterally pulled out of Ukraine he would just tell everyday Russians that he defeated NATO and saved Russia from invasion.

Every country has a tipping point. Russia is no stranger to revolutions, and you cannot hide the losses Russia is taking — both in terms of casualties and the strikes at home to the energy and industrial sectors.

The biggest problem is what happens then.
China may decide that they can occupy a lot of Russia easily, and in certain areas the locals may not be that opposed to such an act. A post Putin Russia won’t look the same, and there are an infinite number of potential fracture points, that it could end up like a nuclear armed FYR with local warlords running areas like fiefdoms - which is Sullivan’s big concern.

 

[suffolkowner]

I believe Sullivan thinks that Russia will just eventually go home.


Zero, Sullivan is concerned about Russian nuclear weapons, both from a Russian preemptive strike, or from a Russian collapse. So he believes in a longer protracted war where Russia simply gives up and goes home. I don’t think he understands 1) Putin isn’t going to do that without being resoundingly defeated 2) America likes to win, so a “tie” isn’t going to be palatable.



Folks like Sullivan believe China will be deterred from aggression due to seeing the Western unity and Russian losses. However I think China sees that western resolve is fairly lukewarm. While Western missiles etc are a concern for China, the fact is if they are willing to bear the casualties, they can most likely prevail.


Every country has a tipping point. Russia is no stranger to revolutions, and you cannot hide the losses Russia is taking — both in terms of casualties and the strikes at home to the energy and industrial sectors.

The biggest problem is what happens then.
China may decide that they can occupy a lot of Russia easily, and in certain areas the locals may not be that opposed to such an act. A post Putin Russia won’t look the same, and there are an infinite number of potential fracture points, that it could end up like a nuclear armed FYR with local warlords running areas like fiefdoms - which is Sullivan’s big concern.

I can definitely see Russia going home I just dont see it happening when the US takes a 6 month break from supplying Ukraine and that gap isnt covered by other NATO countries. It strikes me that the longer this conflict is prolonged the greater the likelihood that it overlaps with a conflict with China. Something that should be avoided if possible

 

[FJAG]

2) America likes to win, so a “tie” isn’t going to be palatable.

Not being too cynical here but if America got a tie that would be a step forward. The last win was WW2. The last tie was Korea. Maybe Iraq - the jury is still out.

 

[dapaterson]

Not being too cynical here but if America got a tie that would be a step forward. The last win was WW2. The last tie was Korea. Maybe Iraq - the jury is still out.

How dare you forget about Grenada '83?

 

[daftandbarmy]

How dare you forget about Grenada '83?

a.k.a. OP FALKLANDS WAR ENVY

 

[KevinB]

Not being too cynical here but if America got a tie that would be a step forward. The last win was WW2. The last tie was Korea. Maybe Iraq - the jury is still out.

Korean was a win, as the goal of keeping SK free was met. Politically there wasn't the will to fight the PRC any further in that, so while the war ended in a stalemate (I guess technically it really didn't end) - it wasn't a loss, as we still have our SK allies in the game.

Panama in 89, and Grenada in '83 would also go in the win column.
GW1 - win for the stated goals.
GWOT - jury still out, but I don't consider it a win in terms of it's cost of lives to pack up and leave Afghanistan, Iraq we went into the wrong I...

 

[Halifax Tar]

Korean was a win, as the goal of keeping SK free was met. Politically there wasn't the will to fight the PRC any further in that, so while the war ended in a stalemate (I guess technically it really didn't end) - it wasn't a loss, as we still have our SK allies in the game.

The Korean war is a tie because congress never declared war and both sides agreed to armistice to avoid the protracted stalemate it had become.

Panama in 89, and Grenada in '83 would also go in the win column.

That's some single A ball kind of war. But sure take the W.

GW1 - win for the stated goals.

Absolutely a W.

GWOT - jury still out, but I don't consider it a win in terms of it's cost of lives to pack up and leave Afghanistan, Iraq we went into the wrong I...

Afghanistan is an L and Iraq is still waiting on the judges call.

Thats how I see it anyways.

 

[dapaterson]

Still waiting for the world championship, per Spy Magazine in the late 1980s: Vietnam vs Afghanistan.

And I Also Shouldn't Just Embed Charts From 'Spy'

It's March Madness time, international division

www.theatlantic.com

 

[Czech_pivo]

Not being too cynical here but if America got a tie that would be a step forward. The last win was WW2. The last tie was Korea. Maybe Iraq - the jury is still out.

GW1 - I'd call that a win.

 

[Kirkhill]

Still waiting for the world championship, per Spy Magazine in the late 1980s: Vietnam vs Afghanistan.

And I Also Shouldn't Just Embed Charts From 'Spy'

It's March Madness time, international division

www.theatlantic.com

Kind of validates the Porcupine Strategy doesn't it? Home court advantage and all.

 

[Brad Sallows]

If you believe that Russia expending resources it can't afford to expend is a "win", then you should probably include Vietnam in your "win" column.