Citat:
Att försvaga. Ryssland är vad det hela handlar om, och som en produkt därav kunna tillsätta en medgörlig regim. RAND-Corporation lade upp riktlinjerna redan för fem år sedan. Ukrainska liv är bara offer för den ”goda saken”
”Benefits:
Expanding U.S. assistance to Ukraine, including lethal military assistance, would likely increase the costs to Russia, in both blood and treasure, of holding the Donbass region. More Russian aid to the separatists and an additional Russian troop presence would likely be required, leading to larger expenditures, equipment losses, and Russian casualties.”
”Risks:
Alternatively, Russia might counter-escalate, committing more troops and pushing them deeper into Ukraine. Russia might even preempt U.S. action, escalating before any additional U.S. aid arrives. Such escalation might extend Russia; Eastern Ukraine is already a drain. Taking more of Ukraine might only increase the burden, albeit at the expense of the Ukrainian people. However, such a move might also come at a significant cost to Ukraine and to U.S. prestige and credibility. This could produce disproportionately large Ukrainian casualties, territorial losses, and refugee flows. It might even lead Ukraine into a disadvantageous peace”
”More vocal U.S. advocacy of NATO membership for Ukraine would likely strengthen both Ukrainian morale and Russian determination to prevent such a development, thereby perhaps further extending Russia’s commitment and costs”.
”Likelihood of Success:
Eastern Ukraine is already a significant drain on Russian resources, exacerbated by the accompanying Western sanctions. Increasing U.S. military aid would certainly drive up the Russian costs, but doing so could also increase the loss of Ukrainian lives and territory or result in a disadvantageous peace settlement. This would generally be seen as a serious setback for U.S. policy”.
”Benefits:
Expanding U.S. assistance to Ukraine, including lethal military assistance, would likely increase the costs to Russia, in both blood and treasure, of holding the Donbass region. More Russian aid to the separatists and an additional Russian troop presence would likely be required, leading to larger expenditures, equipment losses, and Russian casualties.”
”Risks:
Alternatively, Russia might counter-escalate, committing more troops and pushing them deeper into Ukraine. Russia might even preempt U.S. action, escalating before any additional U.S. aid arrives. Such escalation might extend Russia; Eastern Ukraine is already a drain. Taking more of Ukraine might only increase the burden, albeit at the expense of the Ukrainian people. However, such a move might also come at a significant cost to Ukraine and to U.S. prestige and credibility. This could produce disproportionately large Ukrainian casualties, territorial losses, and refugee flows. It might even lead Ukraine into a disadvantageous peace”
”More vocal U.S. advocacy of NATO membership for Ukraine would likely strengthen both Ukrainian morale and Russian determination to prevent such a development, thereby perhaps further extending Russia’s commitment and costs”.
”Likelihood of Success:
Eastern Ukraine is already a significant drain on Russian resources, exacerbated by the accompanying Western sanctions. Increasing U.S. military aid would certainly drive up the Russian costs, but doing so could also increase the loss of Ukrainian lives and territory or result in a disadvantageous peace settlement. This would generally be seen as a serious setback for U.S. policy”.
Yes så är det. Syftet var att försvaga Ryssland men det slog fel på så många sätt.
Lite som att skjuta sig själv(Europeiska Unionen)i foten.
Om judar(Bland annat Soros) kontrollerar EU och judar styr i Ukraina så undrar man ju vad dom vill med detta.
Putin är ju lika känd judeälskare som Åkesson.
Ja komplext
