Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-23 and Invasion

[crazy canuck]

Apparently the US placed restrictions on ANY western-provided weapons strike in russia proper. As in, if you use this SCALP or Storm Shadow to hit Belgorod, we will stop providing aid.

I'm not sure what the Biden administration is thinking here. In 20 or 100 years nobody will remember or care about your build back better or inflation reduction act. They will remember how you fumbled your way to "realpolitk" cynicism, using Ukrainian lives.

11 civilians were murdered in Kharkiv yesterday. Ukraine knows where those launchers are but is not "allowed" to hit them. What the actual fuck.

Yes, he also said it an interview he did with the New York Times.

Here is a gifted link

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/21/world/europe/ukraine-zelensky-interview.html?unlocked_article_code=1.tk0.44S5.uo3An9weispV&smid=url-share




A quote from the interview, which makes it very clear why we should stop taking a Russian defeat for granted.  It's the kind of foolishness that leads to bad policy decisions by our political leaders.

His comments, made in an interview on Monday with The New York Times in central Kyiv, were among his most full-throated appeals yet to the United States and its NATO allies for more help. Over 50 minutes at the ornate House With Chimeras in the presidential offices, he spoke with a mix of frustration and bewilderment at the West's reluctance to take bolder steps to ensure that Ukraine prevails.
Mr. Zelensky has long lobbied the West, for more weapons in particular. But his pleas this week come at a critical time for Ukraine's war effort, with its army in retreat and a new package of American arms yet to arrive in sufficient quantities. Not since the early days of the war has Ukraine faced as grave a military challenge, analysts say.

[crazy canuck]

[If you listen to the Youtube video Jacob linked, it is the Youtuber who is making the claim.

It's ironic that you have accused me of making a strawman argument when you don't even bother listening to The link I am responding to.

You are doubling down on the ignorance that I am critical of.  You are defending a YouTube post that you didn't bother seeing without any knowledge of the content.  You are a perfect illustration of our no descent into complete and utter ignorance as society because no one actually reads or listens anymore.  It all social media pseudo news.

Okay, Boomer. 

I'm not even going to try to rebut this drivel.

As I expected.  You would've had to apologize.

[The Minsky Moment]

Not familiar with this news outlet, but if the quotation is accurate, it puts some nuance to the situation.

https://www.intellinews.com/us-secretary-of-state-blinken-says-ukraine-free-to-use-us-made-weapons-to-strike-russia-325478/

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said Ukraine has to "make its own choice" when deciding to use US-made weapons to strike targets inside Russia .

"We've not enabled or encouraged strikes outside of Ukraine, but ultimately, Ukraine has to make decisions for itself about how it's going to conduct this war," he said during a visit to Kyiv on May 15.

The remarks are a significant softening of the previous demands that Ukraine must not use Nato-made weapons on targets inside Russia, because of fears of escalation and provoking a retaliatory strike by Russia against a Nato country.

The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) responded with a strongly worded statement that reminded the West that Russia's military doctrine allows it to use nuclear weapons if attacked.

Incidentally a linked story indicates I may have misjudged the effectiveness of the refinery strikes.

[crazy canuck]

If accurate the current US administration is not communicating very well if the leader of Ukraine has not got the message.

Nuance is a polite way of saying incompetent in this context

[The Minsky Moment]

Seems like there is nuance on both sides of the equation.  Zelensky doesn't flat out say there is a prohibition; he uses the 3d person to say the Ukranian forces responding to attacks act on an "understanding" of such a prohibition.  Perhaps there is some loss in translation, but I read that as consistent with Blinken's statement. Zelensky wants a clear statement of permission, which is understandable; Blinken prefers to maintain a level of distance which I personally think is mistaken but is not an irrational position for an American diplomat.

[crazy canuck]

Seems like there is nuance on both sides of the equation.  Zelensky doesn't flat out say there is a prohibition; he uses the 3d person to say the Ukranian forces responding to attacks act on an "understanding" of such a prohibition.  Perhaps there is some loss in translation, but I read that as consistent with Blinken's statement. Zelensky wants a clear statement of permission, which is understandable; Blinken prefers to maintain a level of distance which I personally think is mistaken but is not an irrational position for an American diplomat.

He says directly Ukraine does not have permission to use the weapons and more importantly he says the Russians know it.

Here is the quote in the NYTimes piece.


"[the Russians]proceed calmly," he added, "understanding that our partners do not give us permission" to use their weapons to retaliate.
The West's primary reason for hesitating — fear of nuclear escalation — was overblown, Mr. Zelensky said, because President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia would refrain from using nuclear weapons out of a sense of self-preservation.

[Zoupa]

Blinken may say whatever, but the DoD and SecDef clearly said they don't allow it. So the diplomatic language is all nice and well, but State is not the one giving clearance on fire missions.

Another example of the Biden administration fumble on Ukraine.

[The Minsky Moment]

He says directly Ukraine does not have permission to use the weapons and more importantly he says the Russians know it.

Here is the quote in the NYTimes piece.


"[the Russians]proceed calmly," he added, "understanding that our partners do not give us permission" to use their weapons to retaliate.
The West's primary reason for hesitating — fear of nuclear escalation — was overblown, Mr. Zelensky said, because President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia would refrain from using nuclear weapons out of a sense of self-preservation.

The quotation doesn't say our partners don't give us permission. It says the Russians have that understanding.

Blinken's statement (if accurately quoted) may be nuanced but it's clear enough. At least as of May 15, Ukraine is free is to use US supplied weapons as they wish, they just won't get any official US approval for it.

Blinken may say whatever, but the DoD and SecDef clearly said they don't allow it. So the diplomatic language is all nice and well, but State is not the one giving clearance on fire missions.

I don't understand this statement. The US military isn't operating the weapons in Ukraine, why would their clearance matter?  American foreign policy is conducted by the Department of State. State also runs the US arms export control regime. Blinken is the last word, unless the President intervenes.

[crazy canuck]

He says directly Ukraine does not have permission to use the weapons and more importantly he says the Russians know it.

Here is the quote in the NYTimes piece.


"[the Russians]proceed calmly," he added, "understanding that our partners do not give us permission" to use their weapons to retaliate.
The West's primary reason for hesitating — fear of nuclear escalation — was overblown, Mr. Zelensky said, because President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia would refrain from using nuclear weapons out of a sense of self-preservation.

The quotation doesn't say our partners don't give us permission. It says the Russians have that understanding.

Blinken's statement (if accurately quoted) may be nuanced but it's clear enough. At least as of May 15, Ukraine is free is to use US supplied weapons as they wish, they just won't get any official US approval for it.

Blinken may say whatever, but the DoD and SecDef clearly said they don't allow it. So the diplomatic language is all nice and well, but State is not the one giving clearance on fire missions.

I don't understand this statement. The US military isn't operating the weapons in Ukraine, why would their clearance matter?  American foreign policy is conducted by the Department of State. State also runs the US arms export control regime. Blinken is the last word, unless the President intervenes.

You are cutting the baloney too thin

I agree with Zanza, if it was the intent of the Biden administration to let Ukraine know they can use US weapons on targets in Russia they have failed miserably on that message.

[grumbler]

Google is a thing, grumbler. This came from Zelensky's mouth, on tape.

Google shows no such claim, Zoupa, and you've provided no evidence that this is true.  "I saw it on Google" is not an authoritative cite.

[Barrister]

Google is a thing, grumbler. This came from Zelensky's mouth, on tape.

Google shows no such claim, Zoupa, and you've provided no evidence that this is true.  "I saw it on Google" is not an authoritative cite.

Grumbles, perhaps you need to improve your google-fu, because I could find Zelensky's interview with ease.

Now maybe you're parsing Zelensky's words in some specific way (and there is some slight ambiguity on exactly what's going on with US restrictions on US-supplied weapons), but to just dismiss Zoupa for 'not providing evidence' is hardly fair when such evidence is, in fact, easily findable on google.

[grumbler]

Google is a thing, grumbler. This came from Zelensky's mouth, on tape.

Google shows no such claim, Zoupa, and you've provided no evidence that this is true.  "I saw it on Google" is not an authoritative cite.

Grumbles, perhaps you need to improve your google-fu, because I could find Zelensky's interview with ease.

Now maybe you're parsing Zelensky's words in some specific way (and there is some slight ambiguity on exactly what's going on with US restrictions on US-supplied weapons), but to just dismiss Zoupa for 'not providing evidence' is hardly fair when such evidence is, in fact, easily findable on google.

Zoupa's claim is that "the US the US placed restrictions on ANY western-provided weapons strike in russia proper. As in, if you use this SCALP or Storm Shadow to hit Belgorod, we will stop providing aid."  If your Google-fu has allowed you to find a Zelenzky statement that says just that, it surely would be trivial to provide a link.

[Barrister]

Google is a thing, grumbler. This came from Zelensky's mouth, on tape.

Google shows no such claim, Zoupa, and you've provided no evidence that this is true.  "I saw it on Google" is not an authoritative cite.

Grumbles, perhaps you need to improve your google-fu, because I could find Zelensky's interview with ease.

Now maybe you're parsing Zelensky's words in some specific way (and there is some slight ambiguity on exactly what's going on with US restrictions on US-supplied weapons), but to just dismiss Zoupa for 'not providing evidence' is hardly fair when such evidence is, in fact, easily findable on google.

Zoupa's claim is that "the US the US placed restrictions on ANY western-provided weapons strike in russia proper. As in, if you use this SCALP or Storm Shadow to hit Belgorod, we will stop providing aid."  If your Google-fu has allowed you to find a Zelenzky statement that says just that, it surely would be trivial to provide a link.

Thank you for being you grumbler.

I'm sorry I bothered replying.

[grumbler]

Thank you for being you grumbler.

I'm sorry I bothered replying.

I find it weird that, even though you are a lawyer, you don't think that claims of fact should have an authoritative basis, and that I am wrong to ask for one.  Thanks for being so, so Languish.    

I'm sorry you replied, too.

[Josephus]

A quote from the interview, which makes it very clear why we should stop taking a Russian defeat for granted.  It's the kind of foolishness that leads to bad policy decisions by our political leaders.

Wait people still take a Russian defeat for granted? Really? I stopped believing that after about a year. There's no way Russia is losing this war.

At the start of the war we were all talking about how we need to find a soft exit for Putin; something he can swallow and walk away with some pride.

Now we need to start doing the same for Zelenskyy.