Photo: Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III and Ukrainian Minister of Defense Oleksii Reznikov at the sixth meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group at NATO headquarters, Brussels, Belgium, Oct. 12, 2022. This is the the sixth such meeting of defense leaders from around the world since Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified invasion of Ukraine. Credit: DoD photo by Chad J. McNeeley
Timothy Ash, CEPA: It’s Costing Peanuts for the US to Defeat Russia
The cost-benefit analysis of US support for Ukraine is incontrovertible.
It’s producing wins at almost every level. Former President Trump, and others in the US including some Democrats as well as Republicans, have criticized continued US support for Ukraine in its war with Russia. They have called for military and financial support to Ukraine to be cut, even ended. They downplay the risk from Russia and argue that the money should be spent at home.
Yet from numerous perspectives, when viewed from a bang-per-buck perspective, US and Western support for Ukraine is an incredibly cost-effective investment.
Altogether, the Biden administration received Congressional approval for $40bn in aid for Ukraine for 2022 and has requested an additional $37.7bn for 2022. More than half of this aid has been earmarked for defense.
Read more ....
Update: How Sending Aid to Ukraine is Saving the U.S. Billions of Dollars (Newsweek)
WNU Editor: The above CEPA analysis is not only short sighted and oblivious to medium and long term consequences, but it is also insane. This analysis also illustrates how dangerous Washington's foreign policy establishment has become. That reports like this are published and publicized with no blow-back or criticism.
It is not going to cost billions to defeat Russia. It is going to cost the U.S. tens of trillions of dollars if Russia is defeated. Russian nuclear doctrine is very clear. If Russia is facing defeat in a war, nuclear weapons will be authorized and used. And the US will be a target.An inconvenient fact that the above CEPA author ignores.
Fortunately. I doubt that such an outcome is going to happen. What I believe will happen is that after 2 or 3 years of heavy fighting, Ukraine will capitulate in this war, and it will be on terms that will favor Russia.
But while the cost for Ukraine will be astronomical, I am the first to admit that the costs for Russia will also be high. It is a warning that I posted numerous times before the war started, and it is one that I still believe in.
But in almost every conflict the victor always get stronger. It happened for the US after the Civil, First, and Second World Wars, and the same will happen for Russia after this war.
But after this war is over the US will then be facing a very hostile super-power that will want its pound of flesh.
The anger against the US government in Russia is something that I have never seen in my lifetime, and they are blaming Washington for the events that lead to this war, and for the war itself. And this anger is increasing everyday.
What that means is that in the future when the US is engaged in a conflict, as the US always finds itself in, the other side is going to be armed to the teeth with Russian weapons.
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan cost the US trillions in dollars, and thousands of lives, and against an opponent that did not have the resources and weaponry that the US had. In the next conflict the US will be engaging with an opponent that will be heavily armed and supplied by Russia.You can take that to the bank.
13 comments:
These people are the same who used Russian origin disinformation to launch a coup against a lawful sitting President.
They have been co-opted by foreign money.
They betray America for coin, sex and perks.
They don’t acknowledge the US Constitution as law of the land.
Of course they write dangerous drivel. The US needs a Gulag movement against these people.
WNU Editor: “Russian nuclear doctrine is very clear. If Russia is facing defeat in a war, nuclear weapons will be authorized and used.”
Is the alternative to never oppose a Russian war? That can’t be the only option.
It's costing us our reserve currency status and destroying our empire.
Believe me they are glad of doing it, Do they have a choice if Z is trying to insist like chen, korky?
I don't know any other blogger, news agency, or defense analyst that reports Russian nuclear doctrine as "If Russia is facing defeat in a war, nuclear weapons will be authorized and used."
Everyone else reports some variation of "Russia would only consider using nuclear weapons when the existence of the state is under threat / critical for Russian national security."
There's huge differences between WNU editor's formulation and everyone else's. As the 1:58 comment implies, the WNU Editor formulation is basically that Russia will use nuclear blackmail anytime it wants because it can threaten war with the knowledge Russia will either win on the battlefield or use nuclear weapons if it cannot. Allowing nuclear blackmail to work will destabilize the world and nobody can risk that. WNU Editor's formulation is dead in the water.
Needless to say, there are plenty of scenarios of the war's end with Ukraine removing all Russian forces from their territory that do not end in the Russian state's destruction. And despite the Russian propaganda stating that Russia has annexed four Ukrainian oblasts (despite never controlling all the territory they claimed) and everyone must act as these areas have always been part of Russia, in actuality I doubt few Russians actually believe this. And certainly nobody else does. We all understand the absurdity of annexing something you don't control, or that the legal exchange of territory from one state to another only occurs as part of terms of a peace treaty, not a unilateral proclamation by one side during the conflict.
Chris
The Editor has financial Russian investments and close ties with some minor elements in the Russian government. As evidenced by this blog's history, he will always back Russia but he does so in clever language.
"It's costing us our reserve currency status and destroying our empire."
IF the US loses, it loses reserve currency status.
If ____cheese is worried about the money that is rich, the large porkulus spending bills for COVID and the Inflation Reduction Act are much, much worse than any spending on Ukraine aid. So spare us your concern trolling,
"But after this war is over the US will then be facing a very hostile super-power that will want its pound of flesh. The anger against the US government in Russia is something that I have never seen in my lifetime, "
Has WNU considered American anger over Russia's involvement in
Korea,
Vietnam,
Cuba,
Angola,
Nicaragua,
Grenada,
Venezuela,
Iraq,
Syria,
Libya
Afghanistan,
or the whole East bloc.
That’s just it, why do we have to appose them? Why can’t they freely trade and rule like the west has done for over a hundred years?
Trying to report on this war from an objective standpoint doesn’t mean “backing Russia”. If your that simple minded just go turn your CNN on and the adults have a conversation
If your that simple minded just go turn your CNN on and the adults have a conversation
Do you want to rework the above sentence with proper grammar or are you content to go Russian on us?
wow your rhetorical and logical skills are breathtaking
Go back to Russia parrot.
Post a Comment