G.I. Joe

I'm 41 and I've got to say that at my age feeling young on what is technically a computer game forum feels positively weird.

I'm 41 and I've got to say that at my age feeling young on what is technically a computer game forum feels positively weird.

I'm 41 and I've got to say that at my age feeling young on what is technically a computer game forum feels positively weird.

I'm 41 and I've got to say that at my age feeling young on what is technically a computer game forum feels positively weird.

I'm 41 and I've got to say that at my age feeling young on what is technically a computer game forum feels positively weird.

I'm 41 and I've got to say that at my age feeling young on what is technically a computer game forum feels positively weird.

I'm 41 and I've got to say that at my age feeling young on what is technically a computer game forum feels positively weird.

I'm 41 and I've got to say that at my age feeling young on what is technically a computer game forum feels positively weird.

Interesting.

For all those who don’t know what the original U.S. term “drinking the koolaid”  means, it is in reference to followers of a Cult Leader obeying the Leader’s requests no matter the consequences. It was coined in the last century when a Cult Leader named Jim Jones convinced his followers in Jonestown to commit suicide by drinking poison in the sweet drink known as Koolaid or Kool-aid (I don’t remember the correct name). If I remember correctly, about 300 followers died.

LOL, “Forty something’s” to me are just out of puberty! 

Canadian Armed Forces and Polish Armed Forces training the Armed Forces of Ukraine on Leopard 2s.

Back last year I was also concerned that Crimea could be a Russian “red-line” and the threat of losing it could lead to WMD escalation.  That 10km corridor is where it would likely happen.
But I am at the point where I think the Russian “red-line” is further back, likely Russian home soil itself.  My reasoning is that if Putin had the backing and internal justification for WMD release, he would have done it by now.  Russia has not demonstrated a lot of restraint in breaking LOAC so why have we not seen the use of chemical weapons in the attacks in the Donbas?  These were sold as make-or-break assaults and if Putin’s back is up against the wall here (and he could get away with it) we likely would have seen WMD use this winter.  We did not.
So this does not mean Russia will never use them but clearly the calculus has to be far more stark.  I also suspect Putin’s is concerned about western escalation and possible Chinese pressure in the event Russia goes this way. The WMD line clearly has a high bar in the Russia thinking.  Further if Crimea is choked out and simply folds like Kherson did, WMDs are likely not going to save them but could seriously unite the west further - even the most rabid pro-Russian shills are going to have a tough time of it if Putin’s goes in this direction.

McCaul accuses Biden administration of ‘slow walking’ aid to Ukraine (yahoo.com)
Still worried about the GOP position?
 

I'm trying hard to not make this reply inflammatory which isn't easy given that your post borders on being insulting.
I'd advise you to first check the facts: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_136388.htm
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_207051.htm
The contribution is a significant portion of our available mechanized equipment, btw. France also leads one of the NATO battlegroups in Eastern Europe.
And I can assure you, while there was a lot of discussion about sanctions and military aid for Ukraine, in Germany there is no discussion worth the name about being in NATO or honoring the treaty if push comes to shove. Even "Die Linke", who in previous years advertised leaving NATO (and didn't get elected for it) is remarkably quiet in that regard at the moment. (Ignore Sahra Wagenknecht, she somehow seems to have lost it).
From a (West) German perspective I can say that we were some 45 years designated ground zero in case of Cold War going hot. The current Russia is but a shadow of the Soviet Union plus the Warsaw Pact countries. So tell us about being at the NATO frontline... Eastern Europe then was on the other side of the iron curtain. Would have been terribly easy to say afterwards "we don't trust our new neighbors, we don't want them in NATO." We didn't.
Now, I'll admit that's no guarantee. But you will never get that. Just as the other NATO members have no guarantee that the Eastern Europeans are equally enthusiastic when it's not Russia we are talking about but some other (as of now hypothetical) foe that comes knocking at the western or southern border.
So far NATO was never under attack (if we don't count Afghanistan - but if we do, Germany answered the call, btw). So don't pretend you know who would or wouldn't honor the treaty. At this point Poland or Estonia are just as hypothetical as the US, Germany or France especially in a case where they aren't threatened directly.
Edit:
And honestly, I think Russia is behind this "Germany and France won't defend Eastern Europe" because of...  😉

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-64774717
New postage stamps available in Ukraine. 

I read the long piece on the Time site, gotta say I do not really agree with it in its entirety.  Now before anyone jumps on that, I absolutely think Ukraine needs to be supported in this war and more so after it, but the laying down maximalist lines in the sand within the article really glosses over some important issues, many of which we have discussed here:
- Russia has already lost this war.  Even if they somehow managed to retake all of Ukraine and made it a proxy, the damage is done.  NATO is going to be funded, united and basically hauling in all takers (eg Sweden and Finland).  Russia’s strategic position is much weaker and is not likely to recover soon.  The odds of Russia actually retaking Ukraine are about zero, but even if they did the costs far outstrip any gains they may have made within their near abroad - even the most ardent Russian nationalist will be able to do the math in a few years, and then the Russian power regime has got a new set of problems.
- Driving Russia from Ukraine - even pre- 2014 lines, will not stop Russia from lining back up on this and trying a round 2.  Nor will it stop both kinetic and subversive attacks in Ukraine itself.  There are only really two ways to secure Ukraine indefinitely by this point, the complete defeat of Russia within Russia itself - so regime change and very possibly civil war, which is very bad.  Or a deterrence guarantor that creates a line Russia will not cross.  Right now that can come from two sources: NATO or China, and I do not trust China.  So until Ukraine has Ch 5 in it pocket, the actual stop lines on the ground do not matter so much.  
- We have been around the horn on this, but guys let’s be up front and admit the ugly truth - there are a lot of people in Donbas and Crimea who are not onside “standing with Ukraine” and likely will not simply say “okydoky, new guys in charge”.  Insurgencies have been sparked up for less.  Ukraine will need to somehow integrate and enfranchise entire populations, many of whom took up arms against them.  As our Ukrainian posters have pointed out, this is a very complex space and opinion’s definitely vary, but nothing could derail Ukraine’s entry into those security guarantees in point #2 faster than a dirty counterinsurgency blowing up all over the internet - and take it for one who knows, every counterinsurgency is dirty.
So as we get back to 23 Feb 22 lines - an absolute must because Russia cannot gain one inch from this illegal war, there is going to have to be some careful consideration of just where the line actually is, or is not.  Is this war worth extending another 2-3 years to retake territory whose people hate your guts?  How do you plan to address them and this, because hoping they simply are going to stay home is pretty weak given just how many took up arms with the RA (granted many against their own wills).
Militarily I can see a path where Ukraine takes back both Crimea and Donbas, but it is long and bloody unless the RA suffered strategic collapse.  So we definitely should be doing and supporting that as hard as possible, however, as to longer objectives I think there is still a lot of TBD out there.
Finally I disagree with the authors statement that “Russia not winning does not equate to Ukraine winning”.  Sure it does, it is called “strategic denial” and it has a pretty long history - Mao wrote an entire doctrine that pivots off the idea. Especially if Russia exhausts itself in the process.

Well yeah! That’s the point in this little series, along with dealing from a position of strength. Any military guarantees for Ukraine following some sort of negotiated end of the war better be in addition to Ukraine owning a position of inescapable strength: significant battlefield defeats of the Russians. NATO membership is the ideal guarantee, but China’s “peace plan” is unlikely to see Russia willing to accept Ukraine in NATO.  Not to mention the complete withdrawal from Ukraine. Both would mean a total Russian defeat, even with the sanctions lifted. So instead of NATO membership someone suggested a new, smaller military alliance could make guarantees to protect Ukraine. That’s why it’s important to understand how the USA actually makes treaties, and its very high bar and lengthy process.  
Regardless of all this, I think many here are skeptical of any real juice behind China’s attempt to score international points. AFAIK,  they’re amateurs in brokering peace. My hopes are pinned on Ukraine with the Western Allies assistance forcing Russia out of the war by inflicting significant defeats on the battlefield. Then come peace agreements, and NATO membership. Not by China weaseling some sort of shaky agreement during a stalemate that let’s Russia start this cycle all over again. All that is a different discussion.

It is that first one.  If XJ can call of his dog and put it back to heel which is at least 23 Feb 22 lines and then stick China’s neck out and actually guarantee those lines, this could go somewhere.
Now the next question will be reparations and war crimes - since China wants to go all “UN” then this should not be a problem.  And no backroom Ukrainian neutrality BS.  Their first point is in national sovereignty and independence, if Ukraine wants to join NATO, BRIC or the freakin Star Wars Empire they must be able to do so without Russia throwing a kinetic temper tantrum.
Do all that and have Putin quietly retire (preferably to the dirt), and we might be onto something.  If Russia is really going to be China’s dog in all this put the freakin thing back on a leash before we really get serious.

How could it succeed? It's given nothing to Ukraine. You're looking at this from a Great Powers Make The Big Decsions angle but Ukraine is not some teeny weeny Balkan nobody. It's several tens of millions strong, armed to the teeth, slugging it evenly with the Ivan and winning  and mad as hell. They're in an existencial fight and even then are aware that they'll probably have to fight again in the not-to-far future.  Their children will inherit the Russian problem. 
They're not gonna take it anymore, and there's absolutely zero anything  China can do to affect that mental decision point -  except overtly and substantially taking Russia's side, which would directly contradict the intentions you suggest above. 
China has no pull on Ukraine. So no peace deal is going to happen from Chinese pressure or influence angling, but from American. And if China starts Dickie g around in the war,  then America is in no way going to listen to their offers. It'll just outspend them and American society can take a hell of a lot more spending and not fracture than China. 

I don't think you can generalize about the Global South in the same way you can about 'The West". There are two reasons for my assertion.
First, the West states share common histories and institutions that make it easier for them to cooperate and coordinate interests. The "West" isn't an imaginary construct. The BRICS simply don't share those bonds. India and China are actively hostile. Russia and Brazil have little in common in political institutions or culture. In fact, what generally unites them is competition and varying levels of antipathy towards the West with the rising economic power to do something about it.
Second, the BRICS don't have the United States or anything close to it. The US acts as arbiter, bully, ringleader and goad to it's alliance systems while at the same time enjoying the sort of preponderant military power that cannot be challenged safely by anyone...as Russia is learning to its chagrin. None of the BRICS can come close to fulfilling that role. 
 

Sure, I kinda see where you're coming from, but I'm here to discuss the Ukraine war.
...So if you have a hypothesis that the BRICS and 'Global South' are now strong enough to defy/frustrate the West and help Russia achieve victory or a stalemate (frozen conflict) before this war ends, go ahead and outline the mechanisms. Otherwise, it's OT.
And saying well, they are the future, etc. is kind of handwavy. I live and do business in developing Asia, and what I see is that regardless of what US-bashing local press and pols may spout, there is simply NO comparison between the influence of Western capital and cultural exchange and that of China et al. The latter's influence and popularity is presently limited 100% to what it can buy.
...When I see thousands upon thousands of top quality Indian engineers emigrating to Moscow, Shenzhen or Joburg instead of California and Toronto, I'll start to worry.

1 year of the war is passed. From the start of the invasion and to the huge count of air and missile strikes. One of my friends has been killed by wagner artillery in Bohorodichne village near Bakhumt. My father-in-law has been killed by storming the defensive enemy positions in the Kherson region 1st of October. I gave 3 of my salaries (all what I have)on the first day of the war on the military budget. Thanks to all of you, thanks for your help. Taking carry of our refugees, helping our soldiers to destroy enemy forces with AT weapons, artillery, APS, AFV, and Tanks, peoples who served in foreign legions. Thank you for giving billions of money to support our economy. Special thanks to battlefront for small support for me, when I asked about a discount, they gave me 2 games with all DLCs for free - I didn't expect this. Some of my relatives were in Kherson in occupation, and all high-value electronic and expensive things were looted from them by Russian forces. And now we don't fear rocket strikes (10 times they exploded 700-1000m from my house) we don't fear nuclear threat, we don't fear the second army in the world and you shouldnt. Sorry for we English would that what I want to say for all of you, I can tell you many things about the war but first i will try to improve my language knowlages.

Why you are flat wrong:
We have spent $30 billion on this war so far, much of which is actually recycled back into the American economy. That's equivalent to something like 4% of our defense budget to cripple the biggest threat to the global political order in half a century or more. This war is less than a year old  and Russia has already lost about half of the territory it gained.   It isn't our "foreign adventure" it is Russia's...which has repeatedly said Moldova and the Baltics are next. Which means NATO...and we certainly intend on defending it hell or high water and obviously should.

it is only just under 6 months since the Kharkiv offensive and it has been a muddy winter. Surely that doesn't equate to stalemate.  What gives?  The only way I see direct NATO involvement is if Russia does something truly incredibly epically stupid.... which isn't impossible, but also not likely.