Ceea ce sugerează Putin este că, în ultimă analiză, dacă înfrângerea militară îi atrage Rusiei și urmează să urmeze propria sa deposedare de putere și moarte politică, dacă nu chiar reală, el ar putea folosi arma supremă din arsenalul Rusiei pt a o pr

What Putin is suggesting is that in the last analysis, if military defeat beckons for Russia, and his own dispossession of power and political if not actual death are to follow, he may use the ultimate weapon in Russia's arsenal to prevent it. What should U.S. policy be?"

From his principal avenues of attack on Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin began this war with three strategic goals.

Send an army south from Belarus to capture Ukraine's capital, Kyiv, and replace the government. Send forces into northeast Ukraine to capture its second largest city, Kharkiv, with 1.4 million people.

Third, extend the Donetsk enclave westward to establish a land bridge to Crimea and give Russia full control of the Sea of Azov and most of the Ukrainian coast along the Black Sea.

This last objective is almost achieved. Yet, as of Monday evening, five days into the war, neither Kyiv nor Kharkiv had fallen, though Russia had committed most of the troops it had assembled for the invasion.

Putin needs to get this war over with, for time is not on his side or Russia's side.

In a week, he has become a universally condemned and isolated figure, and his country has been made the target of sanctions by almost the entire West. He is being depicted as an aggressor, even a war criminal, who is brutalizing a smaller neighbor, which, in its fierce and brave resistance, has taken on the aspect of a heroic nation.

The world is rallying to Ukraine.

In the UN Security Council, which Russia chairs, only Russia voted to veto a resolution denouncing it for aggression. India, China and the United Arab Emirates abstained.

As for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, his defiance of demands for surrender is being portrayed as Churchillian.
+++
What Putin is suggesting is that in the last analysis, if military defeat beckons for Russia, and his own dispossession of power and political if not actual death are to follow, he may use the ultimate weapon in Russia's arsenal to prevent it. What should U.S. policy be?"

From his principal avenues of attack on Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin began this war with three strategic goals.

Send an army south from Belarus to capture Ukraine's capital, Kyiv, and replace the government. Send forces into northeast Ukraine to capture its second largest city, Kharkiv, with 1.4 million people.

Third, extend the Donetsk enclave westward to establish a land bridge to Crimea and give Russia full control of the Sea of Azov and most of the Ukrainian coast along the Black Sea.

This last objective is almost achieved. Yet, as of Monday evening, five days into the war, neither Kyiv nor Kharkiv had fallen, though Russia had committed most of the troops it had assembled for the invasion.

Putin needs to get this war over with, for time is not on his side or Russia's side.

In a week, he has become a universally condemned and isolated figure, and his country has been made the target of sanctions by almost the entire West. He is being depicted as an aggressor, even a war criminal, who is brutalizing a smaller neighbor, which, in its fierce and brave resistance, has taken on the aspect of a heroic nation.

The world is rallying to Ukraine.

In the UN Security Council, which Russia chairs, only Russia voted to veto a resolution denouncing it for aggression. India, China and the United Arab Emirates abstained.

As for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, his defiance of demands for surrender is being portrayed as Churchillian.
Have something to say about this column?
Visit Gab - The social network that champions free speech - Comment without Censorship!
Or visit Pat's FaceBook page and post your comments....

Moreover, serious military aid to Ukraine will soon begin.

Europeans and Americans have promised more Javelin missiles to destroy Russian tanks and armor, and Stinger anti-aircraft missiles of the type that took a heavy toll of Russian helicopters in the Afghan war of the 1980s.

NATO is uniting. Germany has voted to raise its defense budget and send its own anti-tank weapons and Stingers to Ukraine.

Economic sanctions imposed on Russia have crashed the ruble, caused a collapse of the stock market and severely restricted Moscow's capacity to manage its debt.

Russian army units in Ukraine may be sufficient to occupy Kharkiv and Kyiv, but that army is insufficient to control and run a country the size of Texas with a population of 44 million people.

The Russians would have to find thousands of collaborators to help run the country. Where would Putin find them among a people that so widely detests him today?

The longer this war goes on, the greater the certainty that it bleeds the invading army to levels intolerable to Mother Russia, which is what eventually happened in Afghanistan in the 1980s.

If this war does not end soon, Putin is likely to lose it and fail in his goal of pulling Ukraine out of the Western camp and back into the orbit of Mother Russia.

Eventual defeat is becoming visible, and Putin probably cannot politically survive such a defeat.

As his motivation is to hold power and use it to carve a niche in history alongside the greatest Russian rulers of the past who enlarged the nation or empire, Putin is probably not going to accept defeat and go quietly.

Nor was it a sign of resignation that Putin, on Sunday, ordered Russia's nuclear forces to high alert because, "Top officials in leading NATO countries have allowed themselves to make aggressive comments about our country."


Have something to say about this column?
Visit Gab - The social network that champions free speech - Comment without Censorship!
Or visit Pat's FaceBook page and post your comments....

Moreover, serious military aid to Ukraine will soon begin.

Europeans and Americans have promised more Javelin missiles to destroy Russian tanks and armor, and Stinger anti-aircraft missiles of the type that took a heavy toll of Russian helicopters in the Afghan war of the 1980s.

NATO is uniting. Germany has voted to raise its defense budget and send its own anti-tank weapons and Stingers to Ukraine.

Economic sanctions imposed on Russia have crashed the ruble, caused a collapse of the stock market and severely restricted Moscow's capacity to manage its debt.

Russian army units in Ukraine may be sufficient to occupy Kharkiv and Kyiv, but that army is insufficient to control and run a country the size of Texas with a population of 44 million people.

The Russians would have to find thousands of collaborators to help run the country. Where would Putin find them among a people that so widely detests him today?

The longer this war goes on, the greater the certainty that it bleeds the invading army to levels intolerable to Mother Russia, which is what eventually happened in Afghanistan in the 1980s.

If this war does not end soon, Putin is likely to lose it and fail in his goal of pulling Ukraine out of the Western camp and back into the orbit of Mother Russia.

Eventual defeat is becoming visible, and Putin probably cannot politically survive such a defeat.

As his motivation is to hold power and use it to carve a niche in history alongside the greatest Russian rulers of the past who enlarged the nation or empire, Putin is probably not going to accept defeat and go quietly.

Nor was it a sign of resignation that Putin, on Sunday, ordered Russia's nuclear forces to high alert because, "Top officials in leading NATO countries have allowed themselves to make aggressive comments about our country."
Watch the Latest Videos
on Our Buchanan-Trump YouTube Playlist!

This is not the first time Putin has introduced the idea of using a nuclear weapon. On Feb. 19, days before the invasion began, Putin ordered drills of nuclear-capable ballistic and cruise missiles, bombers and warships.

In his speech announcing the military operation in Ukraine, Putin warned that countries that interfere with Russia's actions will face "consequences you have never seen."

Would Putin exercise what has been called the "Samson Option" - pulling down the pillars of the temple and taking your enemies with you?

What Putin is suggesting is that in the last analysis, if military defeat beckons for Russia, and his own dispossession of power and political if not actual death are to follow, he may use the ultimate weapon in Russia's arsenal to prevent it.

What should U.S. policy be?

Avoid a widening of the war by preventing any escalation to nuclear weapons. Secure the independence of Ukraine. Effect the removal of Russian troops from Ukrainian territory.

If this requires that Ukraine give up any ambition to become a NATO nation, Putin's declared purpose in launching the war, so be it. We might have avoided this war had we done so before it was begun.

This is not where we appear to be headed.

Finland, and Sweden, it is now being said, should be invited into NATO. Were that to happen, the U.S. would be obligated to help defend the 830-mile Finnish border with Russia.

This would be an act of hubris of the kind that has led to great wars. Watch the Latest Videos
on Our Buchanan-Trump YouTube Playlist!

This is not the first time Putin has introduced the idea of using a nuclear weapon. On Feb. 19, days before the invasion began, Putin ordered drills of nuclear-capable ballistic and cruise missiles, bombers and warships.

In his speech announcing the military operation in Ukraine, Putin warned that countries that interfere with Russia's actions will face "consequences you have never seen."

Would Putin exercise what has been called the "Samson Option" - pulling down the pillars of the temple and taking your enemies with you?

What Putin is suggesting is that in the last analysis, if military defeat beckons for Russia, and his own dispossession of power and political if not actual death are to follow, he may use the ultimate weapon in Russia's arsenal to prevent it.

What should U.S. policy be?

Avoid a widening of the war by preventing any escalation to nuclear weapons. Secure the independence of Ukraine. Effect the removal of Russian troops from Ukrainian territory.

If this requires that Ukraine give up any ambition to become a NATO nation, Putin's declared purpose in launching the war, so be it. We might have avoided this war had we done so before it was begun.

This is not where we appear to be headed.

Finland, and Sweden, it is now being said, should be invited into NATO. Were that to happen, the U.S. would be obligated to help defend the 830-mile Finnish border with Russia.

This would be an act of hubris of the kind that has led to great wars.
+++
[justify]Ceea ce sugerează Putin este că, în ultimă analiză, dacă înfrângerea militară îi atrage Rusiei și urmează să urmeze propria sa deposedare de putere și moarte politică, dacă nu chiar reală, el ar putea folosi arma supremă din arsenalul Rusiei pentru a o preveni. Care ar trebui să fie politica SUA?” Din principalele sale căi de atac asupra Ucrainei, președintele rus Vladimir Putin a început acest război cu trei obiective strategice. Trimite o armată la sud din Belarus pentru a captura capitala Ucrainei, Kiev, și pentru a înlocui guvernul. Trimite forțe în nord-estul Ucrainei pentru a captura al doilea oraș ca mărime al său, Harkiv, cu 1,4 milioane de oameni. În al treilea rând, extindeți enclava Donețk spre vest pentru a stabili un pod terestre spre Crimeea și pentru a oferi Rusiei controlul deplin asupra Mării Azov și a majorității coastei ucrainene de-a lungul Mării Negre. Acest ultim obiectiv este aproape atins. Cu toate acestea, de luni seara, la cinci zile de război, nici Kievul, nici Harkov nu căzuseră, deși Rusia a angajat majoritatea trupelor pe care le adunase pentru invazie. Putin trebuie să pună capăt acestui război, pentru că timpul nu este de partea lui sau de partea Rusiei. Într-o săptămână, el a devenit o figură condamnată universal și izolată, iar țara sa a fost făcută ținta sancțiunilor de aproape tot Occidentul. El este înfățișat ca un agresor, chiar un criminal de război, care brutalizează un vecin mai mic, care, în rezistența sa aprigă și curajoasă, a căpătat aspectul unei națiuni eroice. Lumea se apropie de Ucraina. În Consiliul de Securitate al ONU, pe care Rusia îl prezidează, doar Rusia a votat în favoarea unei rezoluții care o denunță pentru agresiune. India, China și Emiratele Arabe Unite s-au abținut. În ceea ce privește președintele ucrainean Volodymyr Zelensky, sfidarea sa față de cererile de capitulare este descrisă ca fiind Churchillian.
Mai mult, în curând va începe un ajutor militar serios pentru Ucraina. Europenii și americanii au promis mai multe rachete Javelin pentru a distruge tancurile și armurile rusești, precum și rachetele antiaeriene Stinger de tipul care a afectat elicopterele rusești în războiul afgan din anii 1980. NATO se unește. Germania a votat să-și majoreze bugetul pentru apărare și să-și trimită propriile arme antitanc și Stingers în Ucraina. Sancțiunile economice impuse Rusiei au prăbușit rubla, au provocat prăbușirea pieței de valori și au restrâns sever capacitatea Moscovei de a-și gestiona datoria. Unitățile armatei ruse din Ucraina ar putea fi suficiente pentru a ocupa Harkiv și Kiev, dar acea armată este insuficientă pentru a controla și a conduce o țară de dimensiunea Texasului, cu o populație de 44 de milioane de oameni. Rușii ar trebui să găsească mii de colaboratori care să ajute la conducerea țării. Unde i-ar găsi Putin printre un popor care îl detestă atât de mult astăzi? Cu cât acest război durează mai mult, cu atât este mai mare certitudinea că sângerează armata invadatoare la niveluri intolerabile pentru Mama Rusia, ceea ce s-a întâmplat în cele din urmă în Afganistan în anii 1980. Dacă acest război nu se încheie curând, Putin probabil să-l piardă și să eșueze în obiectivul său de a scoate Ucraina din tabăra occidentală și înapoi pe orbita Mamei Rusii. Înfrângerea eventuală devine vizibilă, iar Putin probabil că nu poate supraviețui politic unei astfel de înfrângeri. Întrucât motivația lui este să dețină puterea și să o folosească pentru a-și crea o nișă în istorie alături de cei mai mari conducători ruși ai trecutului care au lărgit națiunea sau imperiul, Putin probabil nu va accepta înfrângerea și nu va merge în liniște. Nici nu a fost un semn de resemnare faptul că Putin, duminică, a ordonat forțelor nucleare ale Rusiei să fie în alertă maximă pentru că „Oficienți de rang înalt din principalele țări NATO și-au permis să facă comentarii agresive despre țara noastră”. UNu este prima dată când Putin introduce ideea folosirii unei arme nucleare. Pe 19 februarie, cu câteva zile înainte de începerea invaziei, Putin a ordonat exerciții cu rachete balistice și de croazieră cu capacitate nucleară, bombardiere și nave de război. În discursul său de anunțare a operațiunii militare din Ucraina, Putin a avertizat că țările care interferează cu acțiunile Rusiei se vor confrunta cu „consecințe pe care nu le-ați văzut niciodată”. Ar exercita Putin ceea ce s-a numit „Opțiunea Samson” - dărâmând stâlpii templului și luându-ți dușmanii cu tine? Ceea ce sugerează Putin este că, în ultimă analiză, dacă înfrângerea militară îi atrage Rusiei și urmează să urmeze propria sa deposedare de putere și moarte politică, dacă nu chiar reală, el ar putea folosi arma supremă din arsenalul Rusiei pentru a o preveni. Care ar trebui să fie politica SUA? Evitați extinderea războiului prevenind orice escaladare la arme nucleare. Asigurați independența Ucrainei. Efectuați îndepărtarea trupelor ruse de pe teritoriul ucrainean. Dacă acest lucru presupune ca Ucraina să renunțe la orice ambiție de a deveni o națiune NATO, scopul declarat al lui Putin în lansarea războiului, așa să fie. Am fi evitat acest război dacă am fi făcut-o înainte de a începe. Nu aici parem să ne îndreptăm. Finlanda și Suedia, se spune acum, ar trebui invitate în NATO. Dacă acest lucru s-ar întâmpla, SUA ar fi obligate să ajute la apărarea graniței finlandeze de 830 de mile cu Rusia. Acesta ar fi un act de orgoliu de genul care a dus la mari războaie.