I'm Happy to be Wrong

I don't think I am because the math just doesn't work.

Here's a question - if Ukraine justifies direct engagement from the US, which other hotspots around the world deserve the same engagement? There are plenty of issues similar to the Russo-Ukraine war that would seem to demand our attention - which ones do we do and why?

I've yet to have it explained why Ukraine was picked as a pet project of Democrat administrations and others not?

I think I know, but have no concrete proof, but it seems to point to personal enrichment at the expense of the Ukrainian people.

None of this had to happen but it was facilitated by a US political party that would pour money and might into Ukraine and block arms shipments, that were already paid for, to Israel.

I know it sounds like I hate my buddy the Z-Man, but I don't. I do think he is a puffed up little grifter, but hey, we all have our faults.

I have more issues with the blind supporters of this war in Ukraine, especially given the reality the Ukrainian people face.

Here's my takes on the situation - just so people know were I'm coming from:

1. This is a war that did not need to happen. The West - including NATO and the US and UK, did not stand up to Russia when it mattered. Bush didn't when Pootie-Toot took over Georgia and Obama and Biden failed when Putin "annexed" Crimea and the Donbas. Those are facts.

2. I believe Russia was needlessly provoked by expansion of NATO over the years, after gentlemen's agreements were made when Germany reunified. This isn't just a Russian talking point, I took the time to look through documents contemporaneous with the events and it does seem there is enough to support that Russia was led to believe NATO would pause.

3. I know NATO told Ukraine - BEFORE the 2014 Color Revolution - engineered by Obama, Biden and Victoria Nuland - that there was a possibility of membership. Maybe it was a Dumb and Dumber chance, but they were told there was a chance.

4. No American president will put boots on the ground in Ukraine and no EU nation will do it without the Americans there as well. No country is crazy enough to invite a nuclear strike by Putin, which he might well do if he feels it all slipping away.

5. Three quarters of a trillion has been spent on the Ukraine side and the result is a stalemate. No effective counteroffensive can be mounted without command of the airspace and kamikaze drones just don't measure up against Russian air superiority.

6. The only thing that has prevented Russia from winning has been the supply of American weapons and munitions. Ukraine would already be overrun if it weren't for them. Russia has lost so many tanks and artillery, they pulled some out of museums and put them back in service. Reports are they are using sixty-year-old ammunition in those old guns.

7. The only thing stopping a complete defeat of Russia is its nuclear arsenal. Absent those, NATO forces, predominantly American troops and weapons, would end this in six months - conversely, if it weren't for the nukes, this never would have started.

8. No amount of money, munitions and materiel will matter if there are no soldiers left to man any of it. At the current loss rate, Ukraine will run out of bodies before the bank runs dry. So, if they don't get troop support, no amount of money will matter.

9. Neither side can advance. This war is at a complete stalemate. Neither side can win. The only way out is to reach an agreement to end the war.

10. The cake is already baked as far as Ukraine is concerned. It has the most to lose - but Zelenskyy and his supporters still harbor the insane idea that they can reverse the tide, but they can't - see #8 above - at this point, it comes down to the people math.

I'm not against Ukraine, I'm actually sorry that America participated in this tragedy and created a president out of a comedian and then gave him a Napoleon Complex - but we did and we own at least part of this.

That's why we need to try to end it.

I'm happy to be wrong, but I don't think I am.