Posted on Feb 25, 2022
Do you believe a military intervention is required in Ukraine?
2.05K
17
19
7
7
0
As an Intel analyst who has worked both the Russian and Chinese problem sets, the strategic implications by not getting involved in Ukraine will ultimately lead to further aggression around the world. We should have been in Ukraine the moment Russia crossed the border because now China knows we won’t intervene.
Posted 3 y ago
Responses: 17
I think Russia and China are two completely different problem sets, and trying to use one to predict the other is... problematic.
The relationship between Russia and the former soviet nations is completely different than the relationship between China and Taiwan, or China and other neighboring countries. Additionally, American opinion and views on Russia and China are different both at the "average Joe" level and the "strategic analysis" level.
IMO the American people would be much more willing to go to war with China than with Russia. The media message for the last decade or so (both the "leftist lame stream media" and the "extremist right faux news") has been that China is the big bad, and Russia is in decline. We have consistently been told that China steals our technology, our jobs, our intellectual property, our trading partners, and our babies. (OK maybe not that last one, but I am sure some folks think so.) Russia, on the other hand, we are told, is experiencing their death rattle, they are in severe decline, and just want to hold on as long as they can. Putin is playing the bully to hide his weakness.
Personally, I think China would like nothing more than for us to get into a shooting war with Russia. The bigger the better. Because, let's face it. If we get into a knock-down drag-out war with Russia, the odds are HEAVILY in our favor. If we get into the same with China, the odds are STILL in our favor. But if we try to engage in all out war with China AFTER finishing (or *as* we are finishing) an all out war with Russia, the odds shift, and significantly so. China would love for Russia and the US to exhaust themselves on each other so they can crush both of us afterwards.
For that reason, I still agree with NOT going in to help Ukraine, at least militarily. Doing so would weaken us and severely hamper our ability to react to aggression aimed directly at us. That being said, I do believe we should be providing non-military support - food, money, and intelligence - and some defensive capabilities, such as C-RAM, ADA, and materiel.
I also think this is a European fight, and our European partners *should* be stepping up to the plate. And we should be backstopping *them* with actual military support. So if, for instance, Poland sends 50% of their forces into Ukraine to help fight, we then send a division or two to Poland for their defense, so Putin can't just change targets and pick off our NATO allies as they commit their own defense forces to the Ukraine.
But I am no expert on this stuff. I'm just a lowly former intel guy who analyzes what date he does have available to him and tries to apply common sense and critical thinking. And as much as I may criticize the current (or former) POTUS for their action or inaction, I *do* have to admit that they have a far greater wealth of knowledge and experience to draw upon for these decisions, and they guaranteedly have more insight into the true tactical and strategic situation than I (or pretty much anyone else on RP) have.
The relationship between Russia and the former soviet nations is completely different than the relationship between China and Taiwan, or China and other neighboring countries. Additionally, American opinion and views on Russia and China are different both at the "average Joe" level and the "strategic analysis" level.
IMO the American people would be much more willing to go to war with China than with Russia. The media message for the last decade or so (both the "leftist lame stream media" and the "extremist right faux news") has been that China is the big bad, and Russia is in decline. We have consistently been told that China steals our technology, our jobs, our intellectual property, our trading partners, and our babies. (OK maybe not that last one, but I am sure some folks think so.) Russia, on the other hand, we are told, is experiencing their death rattle, they are in severe decline, and just want to hold on as long as they can. Putin is playing the bully to hide his weakness.
Personally, I think China would like nothing more than for us to get into a shooting war with Russia. The bigger the better. Because, let's face it. If we get into a knock-down drag-out war with Russia, the odds are HEAVILY in our favor. If we get into the same with China, the odds are STILL in our favor. But if we try to engage in all out war with China AFTER finishing (or *as* we are finishing) an all out war with Russia, the odds shift, and significantly so. China would love for Russia and the US to exhaust themselves on each other so they can crush both of us afterwards.
For that reason, I still agree with NOT going in to help Ukraine, at least militarily. Doing so would weaken us and severely hamper our ability to react to aggression aimed directly at us. That being said, I do believe we should be providing non-military support - food, money, and intelligence - and some defensive capabilities, such as C-RAM, ADA, and materiel.
I also think this is a European fight, and our European partners *should* be stepping up to the plate. And we should be backstopping *them* with actual military support. So if, for instance, Poland sends 50% of their forces into Ukraine to help fight, we then send a division or two to Poland for their defense, so Putin can't just change targets and pick off our NATO allies as they commit their own defense forces to the Ukraine.
But I am no expert on this stuff. I'm just a lowly former intel guy who analyzes what date he does have available to him and tries to apply common sense and critical thinking. And as much as I may criticize the current (or former) POTUS for their action or inaction, I *do* have to admit that they have a far greater wealth of knowledge and experience to draw upon for these decisions, and they guaranteedly have more insight into the true tactical and strategic situation than I (or pretty much anyone else on RP) have.
(2)
(0)
I'm going to look at this in the light that WW2 was. We, as a Nation, said we were gonna stay neutral during the war but supplied weapons and equipment to the UK. DC was focusing too much on the front lawn and barely paying attention to the back yard fence. For 2 years the US managed to stay out of the fight until Japan decided to try and hit us with a knock out sucker punch. We all know what happened after that. We had to jump in and kick Germany and Japan out of a lot of territory.
This current situation could almost be seen in the same light. What is to stop Russia from hitting other countries? Hell, what's to stop China from smacking Taiwan?
We either need to be BOG in Ukraine or at the very least providing Air Cover and CAS. While at the same time, getting prepared for China to get froggy and jump
This current situation could almost be seen in the same light. What is to stop Russia from hitting other countries? Hell, what's to stop China from smacking Taiwan?
We either need to be BOG in Ukraine or at the very least providing Air Cover and CAS. While at the same time, getting prepared for China to get froggy and jump
(1)
(0)
As much as I hate to say it you might just be right. We've worked both those areas also and I'm convinced China is looking very closely at where lines will be drawn. Obama's failure in Syria and Trumps in Northern Iraq with the Kurds I believe gave Putin some solid intel with which to work. Now Biden has provided more weakness signals and Germany and Italy's reluctance to move on removing Russia from SWIFT (though earlier today Italy finally stated that they support Russia's removal from SWIFT) show their primary concern over economics. I posted a report a few minutes ago on ongoing activities & will add more as I receive them.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next