Democracy’s Fiery Ordeal: The War in Ukraine 🇺🇦

[sherpa]

I'll go out on a limb and risk condemnation, but I'd fully support the use of US quality cluster munitions against the Russian forces, with significant and strict rules of engagement.

Perfect weapon for the current battle situation, and the risk can be significantly mitigated.

[Tiberius]

 

[Coffeesforclosers]

59 minutes ago, sherpa said:

I'll go out on a limb and risk condemnation, but I'd fully support the use of US quality cluster munitions against the Russian forces, with significant and strict rules of engagement.

Perfect weapon for the current battle situation, and the risk can be significantly mitigated.

 

Generally, I'm for giving the Ukrainians whatever they ask for, in whatever quantities we can spare. They seem to have a very good grasp on what capabilities they need, and also what capabilities they need to maintain. 

 

If Clusters bombs are it, by all means.

 

[sherpa]

1 hour ago, Coffeesforclosers said:

 

Generally, I'm for giving the Ukrainians whatever they ask for, in whatever quantities we can spare. They seem to have a very good grasp on what capabilities they need, and also what capabilities they need to maintain. 

 

If Clusters bombs are it, by all means.

 

 

Not without restrictions in this case, but it's the perfect solution to what they are facing.

[Coffeesforclosers]

7 minutes ago, sherpa said:

 

Not without restrictions in this case, but it's the perfect solution to what they are facing.

 

Anything that cuts down the amount of time they have to spend breaching minefields and assaulting fortifications.  Whenever Ukraine's been able to increase the tempo of their operations, Russia's come off the worse. 

 

 

[SoCal Deek]

10 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Yeah. 8 long years …

…. Deek, are you sure you don’t need a mental competency exam? Or maybe the sun and the umm, Bud Lights got to you. 

Well the sun finally broke through the coastal cloud cover yesterday afternoon, and I’m not sure I’ve ever had a Bud Light…but I can assure you my mental faculties are just fine. I do find it amazing how hard I have to argue on here that this war is stupid and that the world, including the United States, saw this coming for months and somehow managed to do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to stop it before it began. (Apparently we were all too busy watching an ice skating competition over in China.) So sue me if I believe that there are many who not so secretly welcomed this confrontation. 

[sherpa]

11 minutes ago, Coffeesforclosers said:

 

Anything that cuts down the amount of time they have to spend breaching minefields and assaulting fortifications.  Whenever Ukraine's been able to increase the tempo of their operations, Russia's come off the worse. 

 

 

 

The only way they cut down the time to clear minefields is by suppressing enemy fire during the operation.

Clusters have no capability in clearing the field on their own.

 

One potential benefit is in regards to Russian troop morale. It it's as bad as reported, the use of cluster munitions is going to impact that greatly.

In the past, the US has used the news media to hint at their use by allowing CNN in particular to interview somebody for the sole purpose of seeing cluster munitions loaded on attack aircraft in the background. 

While front line Russian troops have no access to media, if their countrymen see it on TV, I'm sure they'll let them know.

Either way, if the weapons are deployed, they will have no doubt.

These are extremely effective anti personnel devices.

 

[B-Man]

11 hours ago, ChiGoose said:

If you had read the article you posted, you would know that the US is not a signatory to that treaty…

 

11 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

 

You beat me to it. The headline gave it away: “despite a treaty signed by many allies …”

 

 

Tweedledum and tweedledee have got to get their stories coordinated better.

 

I read the New York Times story or I missed the headline.

 

It must be depressing to have to spin all your responses.

 

.

[ChiGoose]

3 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

Tweedledum and tweedledee have got to get their stories coordinated better.

 

I read the New York Times story or I missed the headline.

 

It must be depressing to have to spin all your responses.

 

.

“Ha! I should have known I was misrepresenting the article if I had just read the headline or the article but apparently I cannot read at all! Libs = owned!”

[B-Man]

1 minute ago, ChiGoose said:

“Ha! I should have known I was misrepresenting the article if I had just read the headline or the article but apparently I cannot read at all! Libs = owned!”

 

 

Thanks for the gibberish,

 

 

Back to the thread.

 

 

 

The Promise and Pitfalls of an “Israel Model” for Ukraine.

The Israel Model is the best of the bad options available to guarantee Ukraine’s future security but is not without risks

 

 

Arming a state rather than allying with it formally can be an effective way to promote defense and deterrence without running the risks of binding treaty commitments. But a deeper understanding of the transformation of the US-Israel relationship over the last half-century suggests that there are likely to be both pros and cons to applying the Israel model in Ukraine. If policymakers do pursue this path, history suggests pitfalls of which they should be aware.

 

The most obvious benefit of building an Israel-style relationship with Ukraine is that it is one of the most efficient ways to strengthen Ukrainian deterrence and enable that country to defend itself. Indeed, in some ways, the United States has already spent the last 18 months building such a relationship with Ukraine. In the case of Israel, the United States has committed to maintain the country’s “qualitative military edge” to compensate for a quantitative disadvantage. To offset this numerical superiority, Israel relies on advanced technologies, much of which it acquires through foreign military sales and aid from the United States. The ways in which the United States is currently supporting Ukraine — including providing top-of-the-line weapons — are remarkably similar. Though they will not single-handedly enable Ukraine to win a war, Western systems such as Stinger missiles or Leopard tanks have been essential in helping Ukraine to damage and repel larger and better-equipped Russian forces. Committing to maintain Ukraine’s qualitative edge over the longer-term would largely be a recognition and formalization of existing practice.

 

https://www.stimson.org/2023/red-cell-the-promise-and-pitfalls-of-an-israel-model-for-ukraine/

[Tommy Callahan]

Ukraine and Russia have been using cluster bombs since 2014.  

 

https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/07/06/ukraine-civilian-deaths-cluster-munitions

[Jauronimo]

2 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

Well the sun finally broke through the coastal cloud cover yesterday afternoon, and I’m not sure I’ve ever had a Bud Light…but I can assure you my mental faculties are just fine. I do find it amazing how hard I have to argue on here that this war is stupid and that the world, including the United States, saw this coming for months and somehow managed to do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to stop it before it began. (Apparently we were all too busy watching an ice skating competition over in China.) So sue me if I believe that there are many who not so secretly welcomed this confrontation. 

Foreign policy experts in the US have known and warned that Ukraine joining NATO was a red line for Russia for 20 plus years, from what I have read.  This war was entirely predictable and yet here we are.  I am sympathetic to the rights of a free nation to self determine their trade, military, and economic alliances but that is not how geo politics works.  I guess there is always cold war style tit for tat and familiar narratives like take down the despot that we can use to support our own involvement in Ukraine but when has that ever worked out favorably?  Aiding in toppling Putin's regime would be a feel good story for 5 minutes but there is no guarantee the successor regime is any better.  In all likelihood the power vacuum and opportunism likely creates a less stable, more dangerous situation across the old soviet bloc and middle east.

 

From a perspective of Western involvement what does victory look like and is it worth the cost?  

 

 

[The Frankish Reich]

52 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

Tweedledum and tweedledee have got to get their stories coordinated better.

 

I read the New York Times story or I missed the headline.

 

It must be depressing to have to spin all your responses.

 

.

Think for a moment about the ridiculous hot-takism of your first response. It was the typical right wing Twitter monkey response:

"Ooh, the Biden Administration talks a good game about complying with our treaty obligations, but they're HYPOCRITES! They are selling Ukraine cluster bombs which are outlawed by a treaty."

Then, when informed that the article clearly says that the United States is not a party to that treaty, the response becomes "Ooh, look at you libs, coordinating your canned responses to my obviously ignorant take." You know what? I don't coordinate anything. At least two people here apparently have a skill called "reading comprehension" so they arrive at the same result.

That is that nature of Twitter discourse today.

52 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

“Ha! I should have known I was misrepresenting the article if I had just read the headline or the article but apparently I cannot read at all! Libs = owned!”

And so the real story is:

NYT (a center left publication) says that although the USA is not a party to the treaty banning cluster bombs, many other countries are. International human rights activists think the USA should follow the spirit of the treaty even though we're not a party. The Biden Administration rejects that idea; we won't be bound by a treaty we didn't sign. It's a Biden "American sovereignty" position, which the right typically thinks is the correct position - we won't let other countries dictate our policies.

But because it's Biden, it must be bad. Or something.

[sherpa]

We would be foolish to sign any treaty that banned their use.

People who advocate such positions don't fight wars, don't deal with consequences of not fighting wars to your capacity with reasonable ROE to prevent inhumane acts, and don't understand the differnces between our munitions and the crap being used by the Russians and Ukranian's supply.

 

It is the product of faculty lounge viewpoints, folks who do a lot of talking but aren't actually involved.

[B-Man]

 

 

Human Rights Watch ?  2014 ?  What do they know ?

 

 

 

 

Oh, no problem then.

 

 

[Coffeesforclosers]

Wow, cluster bombs are a super important talking point now.

 

I never new that controlling access to weapons reduces violence. So I guess gun control secretly works? 

[L Ron Burgundy]

6 minutes ago, Coffeesforclosers said:

Wow, cluster bombs are a super important talking point now.

 

I never new that controlling access to weapons reduces violence. So I guess gun control secretly works? 

Yeah let's let Russia use whatever tf they want to use and limit what Ukraine can.  On their own land.  Winning recipe.  

[B-Man]

 

 

Biden's first press secretary.

 

 

 

[sherpa]

58 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

Biden's first press secretary.

 

 

 

 

She is specially responding to a question regarding the use of cluster bombs against civilians. Go to the 15 second mark of the link.

Cluster bombs in known civilian areas is clearly a war crime.

 

That is not the case now presented with the latest weapons promise to Ukraine. If they do deploy them against known civilian targets, it should be judged as a war crime.

 

On a side note, what a difference between this Press Sec. and the moron they are using now.

[sherpa]

1 hour ago, L Ron Burgundy said:

Yeah let's let Russia use whatever tf they want to use and limit what Ukraine can.  On their own land.  Winning recipe.  

 

Here's the US response to using cluster bombs.

 

The cluster bombs are those fat bombs, three, one by his left ear and two at the outboard stations.

What he has his arm on is HARM, also discussed in this thread, and on his head is a Sidewinder heater with front quarter capability.

The other side of the airplane is similarly armed, so that's six clusters, two Sidewinders and two HARM missiles.

 

Standard alert 15 loadout at sea on a carrier. If there is time, and the threat is known to not require certain weapons, they would be downloaded, time permitting.