Does the cost of the war in Ukraine exceed the benefits?

All governments are inherently corrupt. Opposing aggressive imperial conquests is always a good thing to do, but no government can procure funding and take any action that insiders cannot exploit for personal gain.

“The fall of Empire, gentlemen, is a massive thing, however, and not easily fought. It is dictated by a rising bureaucracy, a receding initiative, a freezing of caste, a damming of curiosity—a hundred other factors. It has been going on, as I have said, for centuries, and it is too majestic and massive a movement to stop.” Isaac Asimov, Foundation

 

(emphasis added is mine)

The US and UK did not stop Russia from occupying a large part of Ukraine. The "security assurances" given to Ukraine were empty promises. The failure to act decisively in 2014 has led directly to the current conflict.

 

Incipient and insipid. Ukraine was under the control of a Putin appeaser at the time, and freedom-loving nations could not resist Putin's aggression if Yanukovych bent over for the KGB thug.

Yanukovych: 'I Was Wrong' To Ask Russian Troops Into Crimea
​

Former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, who was ousted after asking Russian troops into Crimea, admits that his decision was wrong, calling Moscow's annexation of the Black Sea peninsula "a major tragedy."

In an interview with The Associated Press and Russian channel NTV, he said he made a mistake when he asked Russia to intervene, a move many Ukrainians view as treason.

"I was wrong," he said through a translator. "I acted on my emotions."

Yanukovych, who is currently residing in Russia, said he hoped to persuade Russian President Vladimir Putin to return Crimea.

"We must set such a task and search for ways to return to Crimea on any conditions, so that Crimea may have the maximum degree of independence possible ... but be part of Ukraine," he said.​

​

 

In all those cases it was a conventional military fighting non conventional forces. In the Ukraine situation it is about as conventional a war as you can imagine; World War I conventional. So all of the traditional metrics of warfare are at play.

 

well .. you are wrong.

 

So we could have avoided all this war if West honored 2014 agreement. What did West do for Putin to annex Crimea in 2013? Putin somehow prophesized that West will not honor his agreement a year later?

 

Off course I do. I have brain to see the difference. I don’t close my eyes and claim “I am an independent thinker and everyone else is sheep”.

 

America's occupation of S. Vietnam and Afghanistan failed in spite of a massive commitment of conventional military forces and special warfare specialists.
Ditto Russia in Afghanistan.

Putin has turned Russia into a suicide drone to blow up in Ukraine. The scale of this self destruction is astonishing.

“Renaud Foucart, a senior economics lecturer at Lancaster University, pointed to the dire economic situation facing Russia as the war in Ukraine wraps up its second year.”
“As long as it remains isolated, Russia's "best hope" is to become "entirely dependent" on China, one of its few remaining strategic allies, Foucart said.
"A protracted stalemate might be the only solution for Russia to avoid total economic collapse," Foucart wrote. "The Russian regime has no incentive to end the war and deal with that kind of economic reality. So it cannot afford to win the war, nor can it afford to lose it. Its economy is now entirely geared towards continuing a long and ever deadlier conflict."
BUSINESS INSIDER, ECONOMY, Russia's economy is so driven by the war in Ukraine that it cannot afford to either win or lose, economist says, By Jennifer Sor, Feb 23, 2024, 12:23 PM EST. (emphasis mine)
https://www.businessinsider.com/rus...ary-spending-inflation-worker-shortage-2024-2

Ukraine is a death trap for Russia.

 

​

Yanukovych did betray Ukraine when he let the US and UK talk him into disarming his nation. Yanukovych was not alone -- the West foolishly bent over for Putin,

https://euromaidanpress.com › 2023 › 10 › 31 › ukraines-nukeless-fate-the-untold-story-behind-the-budapest-betrayal
Ukraine's nukeless fate: the untold story behind the Budapest ***betrayal***

Oct 31, 2023The Treaty was adopted contrary to Ukrainian public opinion in 1993, when, according to the independent research center "Democratic Initiatives," 45.3% preferred "nuclear-weapon status" for Ukraine, whereas 35% selected disarmament. George E. Bogden, a Krauthammer Fellow and an Olin
https://euromaidanpress.com/2023/10...he-untold-story-behind-the-budapest-betrayal/
(emphasis mine)

It is perhaps ironic that The Bidens are the only prominent members of the West's political establishment that acted decisively to stop the Russian conquest of Ukraine in 2014.

 

Under the terms of the Budapest Memorandum, Russia, the US, and the UK confirmed their recognition of Ukraine, and guaranteed to safeguard its independence.

The US and UK have and continue to fulfill their commitment. Russia has not.

Yanukovych is in hiding in Russia, Putin's puppet in waiting.

 

IMO, Yanukovych has betrayed Ukraine, and the US and the UK did not "safeguard its independence".

1. https://www.londonmet.ac.uk › news › articles › the-betrayal-of-ukraine-took-place-years-ago
   The betrayal of Ukraine took place years ago
   In return, Kyiv was promised security and financial aid under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances. This agreement with Russia, Britain and the United States provided Ukraine with assurances that its independence and sovereignty based on the existing borders would be respected.
   https://www.londonmet.ac.uk/news/articles/the-betrayal-of-ukraine-took-place-years-ago/

 

The US and UK are making a concerted effort to safeguard Ukraine's independence.

Putin and his Republican lickspittles obviously have an alternative agenda.

 

You've got your chronology and historical context wrong. Putin annexed Crimea AFTER the "Maidan Revolution", in which the Kiev-based Ukrainian oligarchs threw out the legitimately-elected president, Viktor Yanukovych. The reasons for this expulsion are many, varied, and hotly debated -- but the thing to keep top-of-mind is that Putin was primarily concerned with maintaining Russia's control of Sevastopol, where the entire Russian Black Sea Fleet is based. Russia has had this navy base since 1783, and per the terms of the Kharkiv Pact of 2010, Russia had the right to use that part of Crimea until 2042. Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kharkiv_Pact .

But the more important concern in my mind is that this ain't any of OUR business! It's a big, out-of-control squabble between two Slavic 'cousins' -- the Russian oligarchs, and the Ukrainian oligarchs. It orbits around economies and which trade alliances Ukraine was going to be tied to -- again -- NONE of our business. And certainly nothing about it called for the United States to send billions upon billions of dollars of weapons, etc., etc., etc. to Ukraine.

If we're realistic about it, Ukraine is about as important to the United States as Romania. There's nothing wrong with Romania, but would we be going to such extravagant lengths to supply Romania in a similar hypothetical situation?

Afterthought: off the top of your head (no cheating), can you name the President of Romania? Yeah... neither can I.

 

Oh, hell, I knew so little about Romania that I completely overlooked the fact that it is part of NATO... so, I suppose that we, the United States, would also be sending them billions of dollars of this, that, and everything else in a similar situation. Hey, we're the "Font of Plenty" -- with inexhaustible amounts of aid... supplied just as fast as we can print money to pay for it!

 

Lol! I'll proudly be on the non nuclear war side!

Weirdly I don't think we have ever had a pro nuclear war side until the recent era, but here we are I guess.

 

Sigh...South Vietnam and Afghanistan are not relevant examples. The Russians are facing another conventional Army, not partisans or guerillas.

When does this death trap start? And if I understand your excerpt correctly, Russia benefits from continuing the war, so how is that a death trap?

 

The wars in Vietnam and Afghanistan involved guerrilla warfare and conventional warfare.

Ukraine war: The Google Maps 'guerilla war' spreading ...
Euronews.com
https://www.euronews.com › Next › Tech News
Mar 2, 2022 — Ukraine war: The Google Maps 'guerilla war' spreading news of the invasion inside Russia.
https://www.euronews.com/next/2022/...-spreading-news-of-the-invasion-inside-russia

Putin cannot lose the war and survive, but the war is destroying Russia.

Has the War in Ukraine Become Unwinnable for Putin?
Geopolitical Monitor
https://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com › has-the-war-in-u...
Mar 2, 2022 — ... Ukraine may not even be possible, and even if somehow achieved, a prolonged and fierce guerilla war can be expected in the western half of ..
https://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/has-the-war-in-ukraine-become-unwinnable-for-putin/.

 

Does the cost of the war in Ukraine exceed the benefits?

No

 

Many Republicans are now positioning themselves as an anti-war isolationist party. They have apparently concluded that such a stance will help them win elections in 2024.
Unlikely.

But the US/UK failure to act to safeguard the security of Ukraine in 2014 occurred under a DP administration. If the RP had not embraced isolationism they might have been able to exploit DP foreign policy failures more effectively.

OTOH, the Bidens aggressively supported Ukraine during the 2014 invasion, so the RP, IMO, is clicking an empty political revolver with respect to this issue and many others.

 

Not for the US and Western Europe.

 

Sigh OK. We'll see what happens

 

Alas.

"TS: I remember 2006. What happened is that George W. Bush, he put us in two disastrous wars and we were headed toward the biggest financial disaster since the Great Depression. So if the answer is that we need those three things to happen for a course correction, I’d prefer to move a little quicker. How about that? But I take your point. Maybe we can have, like, a nuclear war and then we get a real course correction.

RS:Wow – that’s…sobering.

TS: We’re trying to do what’s right. And 2006/2008 did not happen because George W. Bush didn’t get impeached, is what I’m saying. I should be a little bit more tempered: I take back that remark about nuclear war. The correction happened because the United States got screwed, and American citizens lost their houses and American citizens lost their lives – and, by the way, there was a terrible climate-related crisis, New Orleans, that the president fumbled. So that course correction was based on the suffering of American citizens. We’re trying to act expeditiously to avoid the suffering of American citizens."
THE ROLLING STONE, A Conversation With Tom Steyer [DP presidential candidate], the Liberal Billionaire Bankrolling Trump’s Impeachment, By Tim Dickinson, 6/29/18.
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/who-is-tom-steyer-w522136

 

We will.
I do not see a happy ending unless Putin can find a safe way out for himself and Russia.

 

I think the Russians are going to have more of a happy ending out of this than Ukraine since they are the ones likely to win the war.

 

Well, genocide is a bad ending, and Ukrainians know that.
Which is one reason why there will be no happy ending for Russia.