Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

The Embassy

America Can’t Give Ukraine So Many Weapons a Nuclear War Starts

M1 Abrams Tank
M1 Abrams Tank. Image Credit: Creative Commons.

Russia on Friday launched one of its most withering and consequential missile attacks on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, reportedly firing 76 cruise missiles, hitting multiple cities across the country. Ukrainian officials said half the country was without electricity, Kharkiv being completely deenergized.

Adding to Ukraine’s woes, the top four officials in Ukraine warned on Thursday that Russia was preparing for a massive new offensive.

Ukraine may not be adequately prepared for this possible attack and have requested massive new support from the West – a request which, if fulfilled, could place U.S. national security at unacceptable risk.

The Economist on Thursday published a series of three articles assessing the Russia-Ukraine war from the perspectives of the top three officials in Kyiv: President Volodymyr Zelensky, Commander of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, Valery Zaluzhny, and Commander of Ukraine’s ground force, Oleskandr Syrsky. On the same day in The Guardian, Minister of Defense Oleskii Reznikov echoed their warnings.

Their unified assessment exposed, for the first time in a public forum, that Ukraine’s position in its war against Russia is more perilous than commonly realized – and that to have a chance to win, they must receive massive additional military and financial support, primarily from the United States.

This puts the U.S. in a precarious position, as Washington must balance the scope of the requests made by Kyiv against the impacts it would have on the United States’ own national security. The reality is that the interests of Kyiv – however valid for their country – are not synonymous with America’s. The bottom line up front: the United States can help Ukraine defend itself but must put the brakes on when supplying Kyiv puts our own national security at risk.

Zaluzhny explained that Russia was putting pressure on Ukrainian Armed Forces (UAF) throughout the “1,500km frontline.” It is crucial, the general pointed out, “to hold this line and not lose any more ground” because it is “ten to 15 times harder to liberate it than not to surrender it.” Behind the frontlines, Zaluzhny said the Russians were building a new massive force to launch a winter offensive. “We estimate they have a reserve of 1.2 to 1.5 million people,” he said, but are preparing a concentration of “some 200,000 fresh troops” to attack the already-stretched Ukrainian lines.

To prepare for this invasion force, the commanding general is trying to limit the number of troops he places on the frontlines so he too can prepare a defensive force in a secure area away from the fighting. “May the soldiers in the trenches forgive me,” Zaluzhny requested, because he had to prepare striking forces for combat “for the more protracted and heavier battles” he expects in January or February.

“I know I can beat this enemy,” he declared, “but I need resources. I need 300 tanks, 600-700 IFVs (infantry fighting vehicles), (and) 500 howitzers.” Zaluzhny would, he said, “be talking to Milley (Gen. Mark Milley, U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) about this.” The UAF needs this much military hardware to have any chance to accomplish the objective Zelensky has given his generals.

“(The Ukrainian people) do not want to compromise on territory,” the president said, “and that is why it is very important…to go to our borders from 1991” – which includes Crimea. Getting more equipment to enable Ukraine to retake all territory lost since before 2014 illuminates two major conundrums for Washington.

First, if Zaluzhny is right and with that much new kit his troops could drive Russian troops back, and if Zelensky does intend to militarily recapture Crimea, the chances would rise precipitously that Russia could resort to tactical nuclear weapons. Second, its not clear at all where the West would get the amount of armor the Ukrainian general is requesting. The approximately 1,500 units of armored vehicles Zaluzhny is seeking would be, according to the Economist, an arsenal “bigger than the total armoured (sic) forces of most European armies.”

Already the United States and most other Western European nations have given so many weapons and ammunition to Ukraine that their own arsenals are at dangerously low levels. Only the United States, United Kingdom, and Germany have the types of modern tanks and artillery pieces Ukraine is seeking, and none have thus far signed up to part with many hundreds of the vehicles their own forces require to ensure their national security.

If Biden gives Zelensky all the weapons his generals are requesting (along with an expanded training program of Ukrainian soldiers the Pentagon has just announced), it is possible Ukraine could make enough progress in time to drive Russia out of Ukraine. But supplying Ukraine – a nation with whom we have no mutual defense treaty – with the scope of their request would put U.S. national security at risk by depleting our own armored force.

Conversely, if we gave up the hundreds of tanks and other armored vehicles and put Russian control of Crimea in danger, the chances of Putin resorting to nuclear weapons would be through the roof. Just days ago Putin argued that if Russian territory were put at risk, he would consider using nuclear weapons. Russians across the political spectrum consider Crimea “sacred” Russian territory. It would be foolhardy to facilitate and support a Ukrainian attack into the Crimea that could spawn a nuclear response.

Ukraine’s national security interests in this war are clear and justified. They will do any and everything within their power to eject the Russian invaders. No one in the West questions their attitudes or objectives. However, it is crucial to point out that America’s vital national interests are not synonymous with Ukraine’s.

Regardless of the degree to which Americans sympathize with the Ukrainian victims of this war, the first and overriding responsibility of Washington is to ensure the safety and security of our country, while fulfilling our mutual defense treaty obligations to NATO allies.

If gratifying Kyiv’s desire for weapons puts our own security at risk, we must decline. If supporting Ukraine militarily creates a high risk for a desperate Putin to resort to nuclear weapons, we must again decline to go that far, as our own population and allies would likely be drawn into a no-win war.

Helping Ukraine is understandable, and no one can question the massive amount of help we have thus far provided. It is an obligation on President Biden, however, to ensure that help for others doesn’t put our own nation at mortal risk.

Also a 1945 Contributing Editor, Daniel L. Davis is a Senior Fellow for Defense Priorities and a former Lt. Col. in the U.S. Army who deployed into combat zones four times. He is the author of “The Eleventh Hour in 2020 America.” Follow him @DanielLDavis

Written By

Daniel L. Davis is a Senior Fellow for Defense Priorities and a former Lt. Col. in the U.S. Army who deployed into combat zones four times. He is the author of “The Eleventh Hour in 2020 America.” Follow him @DanielLDavis1.



  1. Tamerlane

    December 17, 2022 at 7:21 pm

    Well said Davis. Measured, reasonable, and above all, realistic. It is incumbent on all patriotic Americans to first and foremost prioritize American strategic interests and the security of America first. Our oaths are to our constitution and by it, to our country—not to any other, regardless of how emotionally compelling another people and another country’s plight may be. We are not the guarantor of the world, and certainly are not of a non-ally like Ukraine.

    How does Ukraine intend on paying for the support we have already sent? Much less the thousands of items on their “wishlist”? Is it not irresponsible to borrow from our actual chief global opponent Communist China to oppose a tertiary and marginal opponent? Even though I have personally trained and engaged with members of the Ukrainian armed forces, I believe it is increasingly irresponsible and unwise to roll the dice on our own geo-strategic hegemony on their behalf.

  2. Goran

    December 17, 2022 at 7:47 pm

    Here we go again with his insane idea that obtaining nuclear weapons is the only path any country can protect itself. If Russia is allowed to hold on to parts of Ukraine JUST because it has nukes, it doesn’t take a genius to understand how that would lead to an increase in nuclear proliferation.

  3. Michael Droy

    December 17, 2022 at 8:37 pm

    “We could give Ukraine enough arms, and they do have enough willing men, but we won’t because those nasty Russians would go nuclear because they are the bad guys”

    Reality is that US and Nato manufactures as many shells a year as Ukraine fires a month (or Russia fires a week). They can’t supply the arms whatever.
    Meanwhile Ukraine is running on new conscripts with 5 weeks of training, and most potential conscripts in the next round are in Europe or Russia and have been for 6 months.

    But blame Nato incompetence and Ukraine lack of manpower on Russia because the alternative is to simply admit that US provoked Ukraine into a war it couldn’t win.

  4. Chris

    December 17, 2022 at 8:46 pm

    Even a small territorial gain may enable Putin to remain in power. He should be driven out of every square inch of Ukrainian land he ILLEGALLY seized so that the Russian people will know that every Russian death in this war was for nothing.

  5. Infantry Grunt

    December 17, 2022 at 9:46 pm

    The author is another feckless example of a Neville Chamberlain cuck. The same appeasement ilk that empowered the rise of the Nazis and now the Iranian Mullahs. “Peace at any price!”

    Now you know why America and its allies haven’t won a war since WWII. Even Putler isn’t stupid enough to use nukes, but if NATO doesn’t find it cojones quick, the whole world will be sucked into another conventional world war.

    Thing is, the Liberals & Liberal-tarians are two sides of the same coin of Libertinism. They only care about themselves and hedonistic living for today.

    From the halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli…
    Sic Semper Tyrannis

  6. Dan Jensen

    December 17, 2022 at 10:48 pm

    Human life and us national security mean nothing to our government. People are dying right now so defense contractors and politicians can get rich. That’s all this is. Money.

  7. Commentar

    December 17, 2022 at 10:54 pm

    Putin will be the one to slay the kingdom of babylon in our time. If babylon has to fall in today’s period.

    Once that happens, that super duper ooper megapower will evolve into a haven for scavengers and all underworld dwellers instead of world’s finest hedge fund managers, casino operators, arms merchants and money printers.

    No more galloping inflation, no more bloody proxy wars, woke culture, ersatz kardashian lifestyles, same gender unions and the like for the rest of the world.

    Thanks, putin. For drawing your red line. For putting down your foot. In 2022.

  8. Dan Jensen

    December 17, 2022 at 10:58 pm

    What would America do if Russia had missiles that could shoot down our nukes in Mexico? And troops in Cuba? And an alliance with Canada?

  9. Mal

    December 17, 2022 at 11:11 pm

    You’re wrong. Ukraine’s territorial interests and integrity are aligned to those of the West. If Russia takes Ukraine it will then be butted up to Western nations like Poland, Romania and others. Not to mention ex soviet satellites like Hungary, Slovakia and to a degree, the Baltics. If Ukraine is defeated then the West will most certainly then be in direct military confrontation with Russia as they strive to recreate the old soviet empire. If Ukraine falls, we are up next.

  10. BobSA

    December 17, 2022 at 11:24 pm

    Appeasement is just a longer process to world war three.

    You’d think people would have learned lessons from the past, but apparently not.

    What the European nations and the US should have done was warn Putin that if he crossed the border all his forces would be completely eradicated.

    Instead we had „woe is me“ hand-wringing instead.

    This is going to drag on and on and result in ww3 because either Russia will eventually take Ukraine and then think they can invade further countries, or Ukraine will continue to push Russian forces back until Putin resorts to react with nuclear.

    To resolve this decisively the west have to stop cowering and snivelling about Putin‘s threats and „red lines“ by making a few themselves.

    Putin will push and push until he’s given clear and non- negotiable boundaries.

    To stop this culminating in ww3 the west have to tell Putin to get out of Ukraine or be destroyed, no ifs or buts.

    He will kick and scream but unless he is given concrete boundaries and instructions this will just continue until we blunder into another world war.

  11. Neil Ross

    December 17, 2022 at 11:48 pm

    I tend to agree with the opinions of Mr. Davis and Mr. Droy in the comment section. How this will all end though is anybody’s guess at this stage of the conflict, but the ball does seem to be in Washington’s court, unless something decisive happens on the battlefield.

    You can’t put too much water in a nuclear reactor. Perhaps the title of the article should have been, America Can’t Give Ukraine Too Many Weapons.

    Words don’t change things, guns do.

    Perhaps Putin will agree to leave Crimea and the Donbas right after England agrees to leave Northern Ireland.

  12. Walker

    December 17, 2022 at 11:58 pm

    Finally Davis admits it. He is a coward. He would sell the world to placate Russia because he is afraid.

    The truth is, it is people like Davis who are the crux of the problem. The reason Russia waves around the fact that it has nukes is to make people like Davis quake in their shoes.

    The truth is that Russia knows they can’t actually use Nukes. But they count on people like Davis to stop us from making Russia toe the line. You may even see stupid Russian trolls even here talking about Russia free to use nukes.

    The key to any nuclear deterrence is to remind these stupid Russians and stupid fools like Davis that if Russia uses Nukes every Russian will be dead! Every single one without fail. So next time you Russians use the word nuke, remember you are saying you are willing to die. You willing to die to make Ukraine be part of your world? You willing to die to make sure people respect you? Because, you will fail. You won’t get Ukraine and you won’t get respect, you will just get dead!

    Now that we got that out of the way, let’s be realistic. Russia has its red lines just like we do. The red line is the same actually. Imminent demise, is the red line. If this line gets crossed, nukes will fly 100%. Below this line, there is lots of room to wiggle.

    We can send Ukraine all the weapons we like, because we already made it clear, Russia is going to fail in Ukraine. There is no getting around this for Russia. They failed. They lost the war. Putin is a on sinking ship. Russian rats need to flee it if they don’t want to go down with it. What is the line on weapons we can’t send? Simple again, no nukes. And no weapons that could be used against the Russian civilians or Russian government. Anything else is fair game. The more Russian soldiers we help meet their demise the better it is for everyone, including Russians. To be honest. It is in Russia’s best interests to lose this war. The loss of hubris is what they really need. American world order benefits pretty much everyone. That is why we have so many Allies. Russian world order benefits only Russia. Same with China. So if we destroy Russian sentiments that they deserve empire, they can actually get rid of their kleptocracy and install a government that is better for the people with much less corruption. We failed them at the end of the Cold War to help them move to a less corrupt system. Too many people in the west were willing to deal with the corruption for the quick dollars that came with it. We must do better this next time.

    So send them everything. Send them F-16s, send them old Abrams tanks. Send them Air defense systems. Die Russians die! It is the only way you will learn. Remember, you decided to attack a neighbor. Not the other way around. Now it’s is time to reap the rewards of your aggression.

  13. Jack Hughes

    December 18, 2022 at 12:29 am

    Ahh the apologist in chief returns

    I’ll be frank defending Ukraine IS in the interests of the US no matter what Davis says.

    1) it degrades (at a pittance) one of Americas two strategic rivals to the point where it won’t be able to threaten anyone for decades to come

    2) it shows Americas allies that it s not a fair weather friend and can be relied upon ( thus boosting Americas soft power around the globe), especially since the US is a guarantor of Ukrainian territorial integrity under the Budapest memorandum. This also reduces the likelihood of nuclear proliferation as a Russian victory would make it rational for any non-nuclear state to acquire such weapons as an insurance policy against conventional attack leading to an increase in the risk of their use

    3) it puts the Chinese open on notice that if they try anything with Taiwan to try and monkey with semiconductor supply chains then their products in for a world of hurt

    4) crucially it denies Americas strategic competitor access to natural resources and industrial base that it could use to strengthen its geopolitical position at the expense of the U.S.

  14. TG

    December 18, 2022 at 12:29 am

    “The reality is that the interests of Kyiv – however valid for their country – are not synonymous with America’s.”

    I’m sorry – but the reality is that the interests of both Ukraine and America would have been for Ukraine to have declared neutrality and told Russia to just go away, and all of this could have been avoided. But the interests of the western elites was to bleed Russia – Ukraine be damned – and eventually turn it back to the near slave-state that it was under Yeltsin.

    Nuclear weapons? I can’t read Putin’s mind, maybe he really is stupid, but it seems to me that Russia has many more ‘apocalyptic’ things to do other than use nukes, if it wants to impress on the west to stop this nonsense.

    1. Take out all the GPS satellites. Maybe not by kinetic missiles, but to degrade them with high energy microwaves or lasers?

    2. Start blowing up other people’s pipelines and LNG terminals. I mean, turnabout is fair play?

    3. Maybe start arming the Mexican drug gangs with serious heavy weaponry? And training? And targeting information? Can you spell “proxy war” in reverse?

    4. Mine the major US ports?

    You get the idea. If Putin’s back really does end up against the wall, there is a lot of unpleasant stuff he can do without resorting to nukes.

  15. Tamerlane

    December 18, 2022 at 12:40 am

    Are you 14 years old Chris? Are you not aware that Russia views this conflict as an existential one meriting the use of whatever means are needed to prevent NATO from swallowing Ukraine and moving up to their steppe border?

    We Americans illegally invade non-belligerents all the damn time. Get off your high horse of naïveté.

    Goran: “allowed” to hold on to parts of Ukraine? Who is going to prevent them? The U.S. is not the ally of Ukraine, nor is it an existential matter to us which flag flies in Sevastopol. It is however an existential matter to Russia which flag does, and whether they have American troops on their Ukraino-Russo border. You know what that means? They will fight. And guess what, they have 6,500 or so nukes, which does matter, whether you want it to or no. If Saddam had had nukes, of course we wouldn’t have illegally invaded Iraq. If anything, NATO attacks on/interventions into places like Yugoslavia and Libya demonstrate the need for other countries to develop mechanisms to deter invasion/attack.

  16. CRS, DrPH

    December 18, 2022 at 1:13 am

    According to AP, “President Vladimir Putin has sought proposals from his armed forces commanders on how they think Russia’s military campaign in Ukraine should proceed, during a visit to the operation’s headquarters, the Kremlin said on Saturday.”

    The Russkies are on their back foot. Time to give Ukraine whatever it needs to put the boot in.

  17. Kelvin Clarke

    December 18, 2022 at 1:18 am

    Repetition from Daniel Davis.
    Essentially, he repeats the idea that we ignore the fact that Russian success in Ukraine would bind the USA to a new (second) open ended Cold War with Russia in Europe.
    Of course, the USA’s strategic interests are utterly allied with Ukraine. Daniel Davis seems to have personal reasons for disagreeing.

    (By the way, Daniel, the spelling of “armoured” by The Economist is entirely correct. The British spelling is used around the world.)

  18. William Mcintosh

    December 18, 2022 at 2:47 am

    An alternative POV to the author’s craven fear of Russia is to first recall the present facts of this 10-month Ukrainian War–that the RF has demonstrated incredible failures in military operations, that its military must resort to criminal conscripts and mercenaries, and that the country must now rely on outside suppliers of questionable reliability to fulfill its armament requirements.

    I have no idea why Zaluzhny would suddenly decide to make a skin-deep publication like “The Economist” his Father-Confessor, but I would raise the possibility that there is some other objective that he had in mind beyond blurting out fears of Russian offensives.

    The respected think-tank ISW points out that a renewed Russian offensive with Kyiv as an objective via Belarus is “highly unlikely” to succeed.

    Finally, just who are our allies, and who are really our adversaries, and who are worth defending, and who are not, is beyond the scope of this comment, and deserves its own separate treatment.

  19. Fred Astaire

    December 18, 2022 at 4:38 am

    How much does Putin pay Mr Davis for his hot takes?

    An unashamed Russian apologist who has been proven wrong in each of his articles, constantly belittling the achievements of the Ukrainians while talking up the prospects of Russian success. It is shameful at this point.

  20. Y. Welsh

    December 18, 2022 at 5:49 am

    About Ukraine not having a treaty with the US: Budapest memorandum of 1994 guarantied Ukraine its territorial sovereignty and the USA and Russia were signers. This guarantee was made when Ukraine agreed to give up it’s own nuclear arsenal which she inherited when USSR collapsed. Russia since then many times abused and ignored the document they signed by attacking the territory of Ukraine. If the USA will do the same by abandoning Ukraine in patriotic war against the invaders, the USA will lose not only the moral ground, the USA will lose it’s leadership role in the world. It will be clear then that everything signed by the USA, including 5th article of NATO, is an empty useless pieces of paper not giving any protections to any other parties the USA guarantied to protect.

  21. Mario

    December 18, 2022 at 6:14 am

    “that to have a chance to win [Ukraine], they must receive massive additional military and financial support”.
    NOPE. What the Ukrainian army needs are the right weapons, not lots of equipment that just drags out a strictly defensive war. We all know, including Davis, that longer-range heavy weapons would wreck the supply chain of their Russian friends. That is why he questions the aid both in quantity and, above all, in quality.
    On the other hand, it had been a long time since we had any news from Comrade Daniel. It is a pleasure to know that he is still well.

  22. Paul

    December 18, 2022 at 8:16 am

    Thank you, Col. Davis for your analysis.

  23. Color me surprised

    December 18, 2022 at 9:12 am

    It amazes me just how narrow and feeble minded are the views of the people in America. It is obvious to me that none of you seem to care about right or wrong, or about peace. Here you are, blaming the russians, for something that YOU did. Why couldn´t you just leave it alone? Was it Russia that staged a coup d´etát in Ukraine? Was it Russia that failed to upheld the Minsk Accords, not once, but twice? Was it Russia that expanded its military alliance´s sphere of influence and tried to go further west? Was it Russia that armed and supported violent neo-nazi groups that viewed russians as “subhumans”, and underwent almost a decade of barbaric civil war?
    Why are some people afforded the right to self rule, and others aren´t? Why was Kosovo allowed, but not South Ossetia? Why were the iraqi kurds allowed, but not the turkish kurds, just across the border? Why is Taiwan allowed, but not the Donbas, the palestinians, or the northern irish? The answer is simple. It´s hypocrisy.
    Angela Merkel already confessed that the Minsk accords were just to buy time, there was never a sincere attempt to have peace. War with Russia was always the intent. And now you want to blame them for doing what you set them up to do from the start?? Grow a spine, America.

  24. Partner

    December 18, 2022 at 9:19 am

    The author is mistaken. Imagine that for the sake of peace and fearing a nuclear attack, Ukraine will give part of its territory to Russia. Then Russia will recover and in five years it will again attack not Ukraine, but … the Baltic states. And in a short time he will be able to annex even a small part of the Baltic states. And it will prepare its nuclear forces to protect these acquisitions. What then will the author of the article, Daniel Davis, say? Let’s forgive Putin and this in order to avoid a nuclear strike? And then China will seize Taiwan and say that we will defend it until the use of nuclear weapons. The author is an adult, but he talks like a little frightened child.

  25. Gary Jacobs

    December 18, 2022 at 10:31 am

    By Dec 17 Kyiv City fully restored the operations of the capital’s heating supply system after Russia’s Dec 14 missile attack – Mayor Vitalii Klitschko

    Ukraine shot down 37 of 40 missiles fired at Kyiv in the last salvo, and the effects of Russia spending well over $40 Million for their efforts lasted less than 4 days.

    Not exactly a sustainable model for Russia. Especially when Russian Ural oil is selling at $45 per barrel, India, Egypt, Algeria and others have cancelled their orders of Russian military equipment, and now Russia is wasting $40 Million+ for 4 days of net effect against civilians…which has zero effect on the actual front line.

    As well…There are now well over 50 countries sending supplies to Ukraine. From the US to Azeris, Israelis, Aussies, the EU and more… it’s an easy decision to send equipment to repair electrical systems.

    You now have a collective GDP of close to $50 Trillion in the countries supporting Ukraine vs. Russia, Iran, and N. Korea, and Syria. at perhaps $2 Trillion. Good luck with that.

    There is an endless list of reasons why Russia’s strategy is doomed to fail, and Daniel Davis’ efforts to twist himself like a pretzel to cling to any hope of proving himself right that Russia will come out ahead are also doomed to fail.

    There will be no nuclear war, there will be no Russian victory, and no matter how much the Russian troll farm livestock on this site wish it will be…it will never be.

    Have a liberating day.

  26. Zibi

    December 18, 2022 at 10:37 am

    If the US wants to prevent a nuclear war, it must scare Russia. And they have to do it in such a way that this war is bad for Russia. They should, referring to the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, tell Russia that if Russia uses weapons of mass destruction in this war, the US itself will do nothing to avoid the risk of nuclear war. Instead, they will provide Ukraine with missile weapons with nuclear warheads capable of reaching most of the largest Russian cities, including the capital. It will then be up to Ukraine to decide whether to nuclear strike Russia. And add that the US does not want this, but will be forced to do so in order to fulfill the guarantees in the Budapest Memorandum regarding the inviolability of its borders. The Russians, as always, are strong only in their mouths and only against the weak. I come from a country that has been at war with Russia for 800 years and knows their mentality very well.

  27. Newt

    December 18, 2022 at 10:45 am

    People keep talking about ww3. In reality, it would only be an European plus five eyes war. The rest of the world is not interesting in fighting.

  28. froike

    December 18, 2022 at 11:09 am

    I always enjoy this Comedy Column. Mr. Davis is so Pro Putin, it’s ridiculous. Putin is not going to use Nukes. NATO should provide all the weaponry Ukraine needs to defeat Putin and his Regime. They should do it definitively and quickly.

  29. W Murphy

    December 18, 2022 at 11:29 am

    Losing Russian territory is sacred, Putin says.

    As defined before or after Crimea?

    Or before or after that last go round of declarations by Putin for areas he doesn’t even control?

    Putin is doing his best to justify to the domestic population that Russia has already expanded.

    Letting him keep any of the above just encourages him to do more of the same.

    It’s called appeasement.

  30. JR

    December 18, 2022 at 11:35 am

    How is checking a revanchanist power, especially Russia, not in the free world’s national security interests? If not now, shall we wait until they are much more powerful and countless have suffered Soviet-style conquest? What about other revanchanist powers who are watching to see what happens?

    If Dandy Dan gets his way, then Russia will be rewarded for its evil campaign and blaze a trail for other nefarious states to follow. It would show that nuclear blackmail works and even incentivize more weapons of mass destruction development.

    Consider how much better it would be to demonstrate catastrophic consequences to the offending country for undertaking such vile behavior. Maybe it should go a step further and any individual that threatens nuclear weapon use should be assassinated as a terrorist. This is not the time to be a dandy, Dan, but rather to show some backbone and resist evil. And yes, you espousing that we should be pussies like you helps Russia…but I think you know that already…

  31. Partner

    December 18, 2022 at 11:54 am

    Tamerlane, are you sure that you know where the national interests of the United States begin and where they end? And in general, what do they consist of? Judging by your comment, you have no idea about this.

  32. ian

    December 18, 2022 at 12:29 pm

    I may just be a simple country peasant, but I don’t understand how a conventional military country can possibly start a nuclear war. If a nuclear war starts, it is because a nuclear power fires one/multiple of their weapons- not a decision made by the country that only has conventional weapons.

  33. Dr. Scooter Van Neuter

    December 18, 2022 at 12:41 pm

    The first responsibility of the American administration is to the security of the U.S., period.
    There is absolutely no justification in placing our country in a vulnerable state in order to prop up Ukraine, as the security and well-being of the West is not dependent on Ukraine’s victory.

  34. Goran

    December 18, 2022 at 1:11 pm

    Claiming that the side with nukes has to be allowed to win;

    -means that Russia is allowed to take Kyiv, or Moldova, or whatever other place on the planet not defended with nukes

    -motivates others to work on obtaining nukes as a deterrent, putting nuclear proliferation on steroids

    Hardly a stabilizing strategy.

  35. Dave Nelson

    December 18, 2022 at 1:56 pm

    (1) Give Ukraine as much as it needs w/o too much damage to our already weakened defense forces.

    (2) FIX our weakened defense forces, NOW.

  36. Jim

    December 18, 2022 at 2:12 pm

    For the Ukraine Project supporters… it’s magical thinking time.

    Think of what the Ukrainian general is, in effect, saying, “With an unlimited supply of weapons… we can win.”

    What else would you expect the man to say?

    Ukraine has already burned through the army they had at the start of the war.

    In essence, he wants the U. S. to supply Ukrainian Armed Forces with military equipment for a new army.

    We don’t have it… or if we could somehow scratch together the equipment… is the general going to come back, again… after this round of military equipment is destroyed and ask for another round of equipment?

    And how many rounds of equipment is the U. S. able to provide.

    When does it become throwing good money after bad?

    The answer from Ukraine Project supporters: “Never… we’ll keep supplying weapons until Kingdom Come.”

    … Please, stop with the magical thinking.

    That’s what people do when they are in psychological denial… they can never admit the truth… even to themselves.

    But do try… the future of the United States and, indeed, the world is at stake.

    Are you brave or stupid to ignore the risk of nuclear war?

    But, sorry, it’s not just the risk of nuclear war… it’s also risks from a conventional war that can’t be won… or spreads to all of Europe in a general European war… or is that what you are secretly hoping for?

    How bad does it have to get before you admit the truth?

    No official U. S. boots on the ground… but plenty of Americans in their “street clothes” just advising… like Vietnam started with only “advisors.”

    “‘F’ the Russians,” is stupid thinking… although, it does comfort the mind of people who are in denial about the failure of their policy.

    Just say, “‘F’ the Russians,”… “I don’t care what the reality is”…. (“Don’t rain on my magical thinking parade.”)

    Wake up to reality… smell the coffee… it’s still not too late… the problem, by the time you do wake up… disaster may have already struck with irreversible consequences.

    Does that matter to you?

  37. Bill

    December 18, 2022 at 2:39 pm

    And you cannot keep shying away from putin threats you must face them mister no matter what to hell with putin is sending actors circuses and opera singers to Ukraine, they will PERFORM BETTER THAN THE PATHETIC SHOWER OF INCOMPITENT TWATS THEY HAVE NOW ,HAHAHAHA.

  38. aaall

    December 18, 2022 at 2:45 pm

    Take a look at a population density map of the Russian Federation. How many nukes to end Russia? I’m sure the Russian military has done the calcs. Oh, and how many Russian nukes still work? Everyone loses in a nuclear war but Russia (and most Russians) cease to exist. Better to do what we can to decisively end this war (and Putin) now instead of giving Putin a win and time to regroup and start another war. Rewarding nuclear threats won’t end well.

  39. Pete

    December 18, 2022 at 2:47 pm

    Daniel Davis is well liked at 19fortyfive because 1. He pisses off the libs, 2. He supports Putin, and the most important reason is 3 he’s click bait = money. They won’t get rid of him but they enjoy reading our comments. Daniel Davis isn’t going any where because of the strong military bromance behind this website. Hats off to you Daniel Davis. It only takes a pathetic genius to pull this off.

  40. Dan Farrand

    December 18, 2022 at 3:25 pm

    Look at a map. Tell me what Ukraine axis of advance into Crimea would be. There are 2 narrow land routes into Crimea. The Equipment Ukraine is asking for is enough to equip 2 divisions plus a couple of artillery brigades. That is 6 – 8 Brigades.

    The most recent “offensives” in Kharkov and Kherson consumed 9-15 Brigades. Reserves Ukraine had built up over months – all gone now: equipment and experienced officers and junior leaders.

    Tell me how Ukraine plans to advance 80 KM against resistance and then break into Crimea without air support and without artillery superiority.

    It’s all hogwash. I’m sure the Russians are hoping the Ukrainians try.

  41. Tamerlane

    December 18, 2022 at 3:27 pm

    Mal: wrong. Ukraine’s territorial interests and integrity do not align to those of the United States. The only reason this war is going on is because the United States, instead of respecting that other countries have legitimate security interests, has decided to act like it is God and can position itself on anyone’s border without a reaction. Of course Russia will react negatively to an aggressive and expansionist military alliance like NATO moving closer and closer to its borders. They will no more tolerate Russia becoming indefensible than we would the Mexican border being militarized by communist China.

    “Infantry Grunt”: wrong. It is you and the liberal elites pushing intervention in Ukraine who support cuck policies which only harm American capacity to maintain global hegemony. It is not appeasement to not intervene when such interventions will harm our own strategic security interests. It was not appeasement to recognize the limits of power in not entering a nuclear war with the Soviet Union over missiles in Cuba, despite the fact that we negotiated a removal of American missiles from Europe in exchange for removal of soviet missiles from Cuba. Not every example is Munich in ‘38. Not every parochial interest of some other people merits placing American dominance not to mention hundreds of millions of lives at risk. The United States hasn’t won a war since WWII because of liberal interventionists and neoconservatives like you, Infantry Grunt, who place other people’s interests above those of the American people. You probably even supported the self-evidently asinine war in Iraq, which was not in our interests even before the initial invasion. You probably supported the moronic invasion of Libya in 2011 and the even more harmful precedent set by NATO attacking Serbia for putting down a radical Islamic insurgency in 1999… sad.

    Walker: wrong on literally every point. Every solitary point you make advances only anti-American interests and weakens our power abroad. American intervention here, on top of NATO’s aggressive eastern expansion and invasion of two non-belligerent countries in the past generation have signaled a series of incentives to the rest of the world, incentives which by our intervention have informed the rest of the world that they must, though not sympathetic to Russia, oppose American strategic interests and overthrow the basis for our power. This challenge is far greater than the benefit of Ukraine being in NATO (something which would be a net COST to American taxpayers, not a benefit).

    Stop pretending that Russia did some horrible unforgivable thing by attacking another country which didn’t attack them… we here in the United States do this all the time. That’s what powerful countries do… we attacked Serbia, Iraq, Libya… the list is long indeed… yet would Russia have been right in arming the Iraqi insurgency against us? Or sending Milosevic weapons to kill American pilots? Or sending Gaddafi arms to shoot down our aircraft? Get off your high horse with your fake moralizing, or were you posting “die Americans die” when our forces were in Iraq 2003-2011, or flying over Serbia bombing civilian infrastructure in 1999? I doubt it.

    Welsh: wrong. That “agreement” was never ratified by the United States Senate, the ONLY body which can enter the United States into an alliance or commit the United States to defending another country.

  42. Gary Jacobs

    December 18, 2022 at 4:39 pm


    How’d that election work out for ya? Nothing close to what you expected. Pretty much exactly what I was hoping for.

    How’d that Kherson offensive go for ya? Nothing close to what you expected. Pretty much exactly what I predicted

    I could keep doing that for days.

    I dont even have to read what you post at this point to know you are wrong. I just see your name and a bunch of words and it’s clear it was a complete waste of time for you to type because just about everything you have posted up until this point has been wrong. And I dont expect that to change anytime soon.

    The same goes for Daniel Davis. How that guy is still allowed to post anything on a site like 1945 ever again is hard to fathom. But I guess there has to be someone who is always wildly inaccurate to compare intelligent work to.

  43. Tokyo Koe

    December 18, 2022 at 5:45 pm

    Putin knows that he cannot win a nuclear war…so do his generals. The threats of using them is not credible, but even if they were they do not justify giving in to Putin because they would signal to him that nuclear blackmail will with as a strategy leading to ever more audacious red line crossing. Instead of pulling back and leaving Ukraine to it’s fate we should let Putin know that we are going to arm Ukraine with even more powerful weapons and that he will never succeed at conquering the country, further that we know that his nuclear threats are merely a bluff.

  44. Goran

    December 18, 2022 at 7:33 pm

    Dan Farrand: “Look at a map. Tell me what Ukraine axis of advance into Crimea would be. There are 2 narrow land routes into Crimea.”

    Valid point, and I don’t think they will actually try to fight their way in. Liberating Melitopol, then taking their sweet time with Kerch bridge is the way to go. If they can hit Saratov, hitting the bridge a few dozen times from the shores of Azov Sea will not be a challenge. Also, they should not try and storm the city of Donetsk, after taking Melitopol they should dig in, and in partnership with the West, negotiate peaceful reintegration of their country in exchange for the lifting of sanctions imposed on Russia. That’s still a year or so away, but Ukrainians are not in a hurry.

  45. Goran

    December 18, 2022 at 7:49 pm

    Jim: “Ukraine has already burned through the army they had at the start of the war.”

    Ukraine has millions of able-bodied men, and tens of thousands of them are being trained in Ukraine and other countries at any given time.

  46. Tamerlane

    December 18, 2022 at 8:38 pm


    How’d that election work out for ya? It was actually what I expected. The GOP won a national majority, and control of the House of Representatives. Pretty much exactly what I was hoping for. Gridlock to slow you leftists down.

    Kherson? For me? Just fine? Some of the guys I’ve trained are in the city there now. What you predicted? I haven’t seen that. I’ve seen you be consistently and deeply wrong for 10 months now, but not yet proven correct. Your sophomoric and personal animus driven prognostications.

    I could continue this over virtually every solitary event of import occurring over the past year, but I’ll spare the reader.

    Coincidentally I don’t have to force myself to read your incredibly verbose nothing burger comments to know you are almost assuredly wrong, as not a solitary observation you have made is correct or has been born out in conclusion in time.

    Unlike you emotionally driven leftists who wish to waste American tax dollars on another people while endangering our own without cause as a result, Daniel Davis is, like me, an actual patriot who has served his country abroad in uniform and who has put his money where his mouth is. Your refusal to comprehend and admit that there are consequences, secondary and tertiary, to American intervention make your “analysis” juvenile and stilted. Your writing reads like “Infantry Grunt[‘s]” “strategic” analysis… an inch deep and a mile wide. “Everyone is Hitler”, “rararah more war now”!! Yeah. We get it. You don’t have the guts to serve our country yet wish to send those who are brave enough to serve to worthless quagmires which harm our interests abroad, or merely wish to borrow money from China to empty our armories in order to weaken a weak secondary opponent of ours, while forcing the rest of the world into an anti-American stance. Golf clap for you, chickenhawk extraordinaire!

    Once again, the ratcheting of risk for the United States with this intervention is not worth the benefit gleaned by this harvest of dead Russians at the hands of our proxy-Ukraine. Seizing the sovereign wealth of a non-belligerent, one which is armed with 6,500 nukes, tells the rest of the non-NATO aligned world that they cannot have any possible security that the United States will not also with them, as it did with Russia, break their promise of “full faith and credit” and expropriate property. This is fatal to international relations and the dollar’s position as global reserve currency, and is something I warned, despite your witless prattling and denials, 10 months ago.

    Let’s put your warmongering inchoate ramblings to bed, and preserve liberty and the power to protect it, here.

  47. Tamerlane

    December 18, 2022 at 9:04 pm


    Your strategic expositions lead to some serious concerns when scrutinized. These include:

    1) Ukraine’s “millions of able-bodied men” are outnumbered over 3:1 by Russia’s, and Ukraine, unlike Russia, as had a nationwide universal conscription for almost a year. Moreover, independent experts believe over a third of Ukrainians are unemployed with the situation deteriorating, and Ukraine’s notoriously corrupt government is now openly asking the United States to approve and fund direct welfare payments to the Ukrainian population. That billions of American taxpayer dollars being given directly to Ukrainian citizens, though with GDP cratering, one wonders precisely what this mass infusion of money will purchase without sky-rocketing upward their own domestic inflation. Surely there will be some “lost off the top” there in overhead. C’est la vie, right?

    2) Russia is training what is estimated to be about half a million service members as we speak, and it is not difficult to determine that the same training officers and cadre are still in their training camps, and have not, despite the WaPo and other regurgitators of Ukraine’s Pravda state, been deployed to Ukraine. If someone with a lowly field grade officer’s personal and professional connections can verify this, I’m confident you’ll be able to find a way also.

    3. As for Ukraine “conquering” Crimea… are you out of your mind? If there was a scenario most likely to precipitate the Russian use of nukes in this conflict, it’s when a solitary Ukrainian foot crosses in anger into the Perekop. (I’d note also that even Manstein in WWII was compelled to fight a horrifically frightful yard by yard artillery dominated fight through that volcanic hellscape to Sevastopol, and that was against remnants of Soviet armies)… consider that the Perekop is equivalent to the “hot gates” of Thermopylae… you recall what the 300 Spartiates did there?

    You are keen to pronounce Russia’s defeat, but I remember reading French accounts following Borodino announcing Russia’s strategic defeat, and similar accounts in German generals memoirs regarding Moscow in ‘41. Those didn’t come to fruition did they? Nor is it simply a matter that one shouldn’t “count out” Russia, but rather, one should recall that at many times in history hubris and a desire for a preferred outcome have colored the perspective of a culture or “side” perceptibly, and wrongly.

    I prefer for our country not to be calculating blindly, and I don’t see Russia as being anywhere close to giving up. Looking alone at the pricing of used ocean tankers, one can say with certainty that the Russians are acting as did the South Africans when under sanctions and fighting in Angola 4-5 decades ago. They are presenting conduct which tells us they intend on a long term course decision making in which the present level of western sanctions is maintained. What does that tell your strategic mind?

  48. Jim

    December 18, 2022 at 10:49 pm

    Goran, the soldiers Ukraine has lost were well trained, practiced fighting men with experience. These were professional soldiers.

    The new soldiers are mostly conscripts. The new soldiers simply don’t have the length of training, practice, and experience… and they don’t have as much equipment to protect them, as they did at the start of the war.

    Goran, Ukraine is conscripting men as old as 50… may go to 60. Reports are appearing which suggests morale is starting to flag… high casualties will do that.

    But I was speaking more to military equipment than men.

    It doesn’t seem you care about the Ukrainians, as long as they fight… as long as they’re willing to be cannon fodder…

  49. June

    December 18, 2022 at 11:27 pm

    As always, Mr Davis’s unwavering support for Russia is hardly surprising. Throughout this war, we observed how weak Russia became. This is the result of the fall of the USSR and the following economic failure. War is very expensive. Now, the US and NATO have another golden opportunity to bankrupt Russia. The bankruptcy will further weaken Russia and it is in Ukraine’s and the US’s best interests to make sure Russia does not become a threat to any neighbouring countries. Tanks and armoured vehicles are hardly useful for a naval war with China. Contrary to Mr Davis’s argument, I believe sending tanks and armoured vehicles to Ukraine will increase the security of the US rather than decrease it.

  50. Neofeudalfuture

    December 19, 2022 at 9:27 am

    Oh lord. Putin said from day 1 that the aid would only kill more people and prolong the war. Check

    Other people said that ukraine allying itself with the us/uk after the 2014 coup would get it wrecked. Check

    It’s dangerous to be enemies with America but to be its friend is deadly. Check.

    Now, the question arises how much is too much. Now? Jesus H christ how bad would it have be to let Yanokovich sign a trade with Russia instead of the EU. Was all this worth it? Maidan was already too much. Everything else has been war crimes and ethnic cleansing. Slow clap. Well done dummies. Now hopefully Europe realizes its time to let America do some navel gazing and Trump obsessing along for a while until it stops trying to rule the world. The world is too much.

  51. Goran

    December 19, 2022 at 9:35 am

    Jim and Tamerlane, I remember a while back, I asked one of you gentlemen to make a bold prediction on how the situation on the ground may develop. To show you what I mean, I made a prediction of my own and said Ukrainians would take Kherson by New Year’s. So, let’s talk in those terms, if Daniel Davis can make a prediction that Russians will take Kharkiv and Odessa, and six months later still be treated like someone who’s opinion matters, trust me, you’ll be OK if you mess up. So, open up a map, ballpark a time frame and tell me what is so strategic that Putin’s military will take that could force Ukrainians into surrendering?

    Not having power for a few days at a time and having their economy in a bind are boo boos and owies considering they are fighting a war of independence, it’s inevitable. Also, don’t tell me Ukrainians should surrender because many of them are dying, as some people definitely see value in being patriotic. So let’s get out of that nebulous category, open up a map, open up a calendar and let’s be bold.

    Again, I’ll go first: I predict that Ukrainians will be in control of Melitopol by the end of August of next year. Your turn gentlemen.

  52. Goran

    December 19, 2022 at 10:00 am

    Neofeudalfuture, it’s actually the opposite, Putin’s willingness to do this to Ukraine is evidence that Ukrainians made the right call when they rejected the Kremlin and opted for Brussels. Yes, they will be beaten, and they will suffer, but once they come out of this nightmare, their kids and their kid’s kids will not be treated like Russian property.

  53. DDisaRussianBot

    December 19, 2022 at 11:05 am

    There is simply zero reason to believe that Russia has learned from the many mistakes it has committed in this war. Their industrial base is not capable of replacing its battle losses as fast as the west can resupply Ukraine, it is true that Ukraine is training conscripts, many of whom are old. Russia has more manpower to work with but i’d that manpower is not motivated and morale is low, if they cannot be adequately supplied or competently led there is very little reason to believe that they are going to be able to retake the initiative. More likely their conscripts will remain the kind of cannon fodder that they’ve been since last February. More and more body bags is not going to be a good look to a population who has little desire to be drafted.

  54. Momo

    December 19, 2022 at 11:07 am

    If Russia actually retained the capabilities that Mr. Davis ascribes to them they’d already be well on their way to conquering Ukraine, but they aren’t. Could it be that Mr. Davis is just making stuff up?

  55. Stefan Stackhouse

    December 19, 2022 at 12:18 pm

    It is actually not quite true that we have no formal defense commitment to Ukraine. When they agreed to give up their Soviet-era nukes, we agreed – in writing – to guarantee their security and territorial integrity. It is true that this commitment is not an actual ratified treaty, and no one thinks that the US would or could commit national nuclear suicide to protect Ukrainian sovereignty over every square inch of pre-2014 territory. However, aiding Ukraine is more than just something we are doing out of the goodness of our hearts. This does not mean that they have been given a blank check. We are obliged to do what we reasonably can. That includes everything we have done so far, and there is room for us to do some more. It is correct that we really don’t have the inventory or the industrial capacity to totally fulfill their wish list. We’ll do what we can, and they will have to make do with that.

    I understand why they would take a hard line and insist on the recovery of every spare inch. They will hold that hard line all the way up to the moment where they make the grand but prudent compromise of writing off Crimea. They aren’t going to be able to re-take it in any case, but they can certainly bottle up the Russians there.

  56. tony

    December 19, 2022 at 1:36 pm

    I believe Soviet pilots actually flew combat missions against us in Korea and in Vietnam, so… giving tanks to Ukraine is some sort of problem? Help me out.

  57. Christophe

    December 19, 2022 at 3:03 pm

    Daniel ‘Defeatist’ Davies is so MAGA: America Security First is always turned into Russia Security First in the end.

  58. Tamerlane

    December 19, 2022 at 4:14 pm

    Christophe: wrong and anti-American. Incurring a legitimate, substantial, and growing articulable risk of the weakening and and potentially the destruction our own ability to project force and power abroad in exchange for what, bankrupting an already bankrupt second tier power like Russia is simply not worth the exchange.

    Recognizing reality—that Russia under any realistically likely leadership will “go the distance” to prevent an expansionary openly hostile alliance like NATO from moving onto their southern border is critical to resolution of this issue, and the failure to consider the perspective we would have as Americans were Communist China attempting to bring Mexico into a formal military alliance and militarize our southern border with Chinese troops, is a great blunder. It is myopic and moronic not to take into account the perspective of one’s opponent, particularly when, as here, the matter is of much more import to one side (Russia) than it is to us.

    Risking the toppling of our hegemony and violating the most basic principles of trustworthiness as we have done by unilaterally seizing the national reserves of a non-belligerent foreign country like nuke armed Russia, is not worth the benefit of the degradation of Russia’s military. Pushing the entire developing world into the Chinese anti-American orbit is not with the Donbas.

  59. Juan Motime

    December 19, 2022 at 5:39 pm

    You do realize that oBlamma and oBiden installed the little used condom in Ukraine in 2014 ryte? All this money going to Ukraine is hush money. The little soy boy was going to spill the beans on oBiden and son. They not only installed the little soy boy they stole ALL of their gold. sooooo you c it’s a lot deeper than the msm lets on…

  60. Rick

    December 19, 2022 at 7:11 pm

    I thought for a brief time Davis was so humiliated in his support for Russia that he crawled away, but alas he’s back with the same crap.

  61. dan mullock

    December 19, 2022 at 8:03 pm

    1. We encouraged Ukraine to give up their nukes and Russia, Britian and the US promised to respect their borders. So they are not just a non-entity to us.
    2. We spend in effect more than $100 billion per year to be ready to fight Russia in Europe and have done so for decades. This war is decimating the Russian conventional forces on the cheap for NATO without any loss of NATO lives for a pittance compared to our spend over the last 10 years.
    3. Of course Putler threatens the use of nuclear weapons. They have done so for years on every upgrade to US and NATO force posture. But they know the answer to “If you use a nuke in Europe, then what happens?” The answer is you have no idea,and using nukes on your neighbor can create quite a bit of nuclear blowback.

    So quit tapping your umbrella and be steely tough. Russia must lose and will if we supply and are tough. Like the Ukraine.

  62. tomb

    December 19, 2022 at 10:16 pm

    America can’t give Ukraine so
    Few weapons so that Ukraine
    Is conquered

  63. William McIntosh

    December 20, 2022 at 1:44 am

    I have yet to read a word here written by the Be-Afraid-of-Russia posters here detailing what in their minds a post-war Ukraine will look like. Fellow UKR supporters, let’s see if they’re actually willing to write it down.

  64. atm

    December 20, 2022 at 8:00 am

    Russia’s smartest, but unlikely move is to nuke now with everything they’ve got.

  65. Neil Ross

    December 20, 2022 at 9:50 am

    I love reading the comments to Davis’ article, even if they might be clickbait.

    I think Davis’ ultimate point is that the U.S. shouldn’t look back in 2042 and say, “so what was the point?”, as they said after withdrawing from Afghanistan after 20 years.

    What will happen, will happen with or without people making predictions. What you really need is someone to reveal the policy options that the strategists in Washington had back in January. The rest is speculation.

  66. Sterling

    December 20, 2022 at 11:08 am

    What other possible armored threats does the US have? Defeating Russia is key to the future of U.S. security. We are never going to get in a land war with China. That would be absurd. Give Ukraine all of the armor and artillery they need. We simply have no other reason to use it except against Russia. A Russian defeat will ensure European and American security for decades to come. We won’t need to rebuild our stocks after that.

  67. Neil Ross

    December 20, 2022 at 12:33 pm

    I think America was more afraid of Europe/Germany having access to a reliable supply of Russian natural gas, petroleum and minerals than from any fear of a new Russian Empire emerging. If that was indeed Washington’s main policy objective at the start of this conflict, so be it, who am I to question the strategists in Washington. No one in America will mourn the dead after this conflict is over, whether that be in 30 weeks or 30 years.

  68. TheDon

    December 20, 2022 at 10:05 pm

    The fact Russia has to use the nuclear card shows how poor the Russian military is performing. The world knows it and the Russian people know.
    The question is how would putin expect to control so many nations with a ground force of Prisoners, untrained citizens, hired fighters spread over mountain ranges populated by millions.
    The ratio is laughable.

    Putin doesnt care about his people, their lives, only his warped vision.

    I feel for the Russian people. They were not threatened by war. The EU has welcomed them into trade depending on them for energy.

    Merry Christmas patriarch Krill.

  69. Karimov

    December 21, 2022 at 7:17 am

    The author should go to Moscow, where his rethoric is very much appreciated.

  70. Goran

    December 21, 2022 at 7:55 am

    Neil Ross, it is possible that you missed the news reports, but this started with Russia invading Ukraine with a goal of preventing that sovereign UN member state from adopting Western standards in economy, education, and so on. You agree that Ukrainians should have the freedom to move towards Brussels and away from the Kremlin if they chose to do so, right?

  71. Neil Ross

    December 21, 2022 at 8:49 am

    Absolutely, Ukranians should have the freedom to do whatever they think is in their best interest. Equally, Ukraine’s neighbours and the U.S. have the freedom to assist Ukraine in whatever way they think is in their best interest. All Davis is arguing, in my opinion, is that the U.S. and NATO should better define what supporting Ukraine ‘for as long as it takes’ actually means. I was of the opinion, at the start of the conflict, that NATO pretty much invited Russia to invade eastern Ukraine. And that overall, NATO would have been content with Russia occupying Ukraine east of the Dnieper. It would provide Russia with the buffer it desired and would allow western Ukraine to proceed down the path to NATO and EU membership.

    And to be fair, Ukranian citizens, should also have the freedom to move towards Moscow if they chose to do so.

  72. Neil Ross

    December 21, 2022 at 9:12 am

    My country, Canada (which was forcibly occupied by my European ancestors) has narrowly survived two referendums held by the citizens of the province of Québec. If at some point in the future, Québec votes decidedly for sovereignty, I hope that we will not send in our military to try and nullify that sentiment. Of course, our big fear is that our war mongering neighbours to the south may chose to support the people of Québec ‘for as long as it takes.’ Countries are not, and should not be ‘under god indivisible.’ Look at how the borders in Europe have changed, mostly without conflict, since the end of the second world war.

  73. Rich

    December 21, 2022 at 2:42 pm


  74. Rich

    December 21, 2022 at 2:48 pm

    Ukraine isn’t worth a Nuclear Conflict. Their ridiculous dream of pushing Russia out of Crimea using America’s weapons will have devastating consequences to America. Many of the weapons America has given to Ukraine have wound up on the black market. Ukraine has accounted for the vast amount of money already provided. Enough Already! Ukraine is a corrupt country that launders the money to make politicians rich.

  75. Pszemo

    December 22, 2022 at 1:08 pm

    @Rich You’re wring and stupid. Ukrainians do NOT sell those weapons on black market. It’s ruZZkie soldiers/commanders who seek additional profits. If they surround and take some UA units as POWs then they have their stuff, inluding Javelins etc.
    “Ukraine is corrupt” – just as any post soviet state before they joined EU. But compared to ruZZia UA is very clean and transparent.

    Ukraine already attacked ruZZkie supply lines IN ruZZia. How many nukes were launched? Zero. ruZZkies won’t use nukes. Crimea is Ukraine. Letting ruZZkies go away with this will make ALL other countries to start their nuclear programs. Because “if u have nukes u can do whatever you want”.

  76. John Cooley

    December 27, 2022 at 1:34 pm

    The US has a moral obligation to help Ukraine, We helped talk them out of keeping their nukes when they were the 3d largest nuclear power in the world, and used our (and Russia’s) guarantee as a promise to keep them secure. Russia finked out on their promise. We should just give the Ukraine back their nukes, which would probably settle the whole problem.

  77. Alan Hopkinson

    January 5, 2023 at 2:58 pm

    Russian justification for it’s invasion of a sovereign nation is no different than Nazi policy of “lebensraum”. As another dictatorial autocrat, only Putin matters. He sees the U.S. government as the only force able to prevent Russia achieving their goal. Everything he has said “collapse of soviet union was a catastrophe” to what he does, invade four European neighbors plus Syria, supports that so it is not rhetoric. We are all aware of the historic failure of appeasement so denial of this is not just wrong headed, it’s dangerous. Russia is an adversary. All the other aggressors on the planet will just see such an aversion to confrontation as weakness…and will then act as all bullies do in response, leading to much bigger problems. Give Ukraine what they need to secure their borders so we can have peace already!

  78. Lachhman Gupta

    January 6, 2023 at 8:27 am

    These leaders are living in the past when not a single plan was traceable. This is 2023 when you can trace the motives and plans of the enemy while sitting at home. That is what happens here with Russia. None of Mr. Putin’s plans is working. It is destroyed before it is implemented in the field. Mr. Putin wakes up and swallows your pride and withdraws your forces to create harmony rather animosity. No one will be the winner here, General public will be the sufferer.

  79. John F Meacham Sr

    January 6, 2023 at 11:37 am

    I do not know who is right or wrong; however, it appears to me that the only ones that truly care are the politicians – who only care about the money that they can get out of the situation. The Russian oligarchs and the American politicians are selfish people at the expense of the less elitists while the hardworking (not the lazy) just survive! As for me – “give me liberty or give me death”! John

  80. John F Meacham Sr

    January 6, 2023 at 11:43 am

    Mr. Davis, What happened to the idea that nuclear weapons were a deterrent? Where is our backup against the use of nuclear weapons? John

  81. Phil Engelmeyer

    January 7, 2023 at 1:17 pm

    Ukraine is of no vital importance to USA. If the Europeans think otherwise let them do what they want without our aid.

  82. Leon Bronstein

    January 8, 2023 at 9:43 pm

    Defeating Russia and their supporters–Iran, N Korea and the Fakestinians is critical to the survival of the west. Not appeasement to terror.

  83. Tom Fitzpatrick

    January 30, 2023 at 11:45 pm

    Very informative. Thank you.

    One point of disagreement is that we cannot question the support we have given to Ukraine.

    This is America. We can, and should, question anything and everything.

  84. John Zeigler

    February 2, 2023 at 11:14 pm

    War now or a bigger war later. Take your choice. This is now a no-win situation. Putin didn’t do this when Trump was President. We have a weak indecisive President who delayed when the choices were better at the beginning of this assault. You cannot assume that Trump would not have handled Putin better. Biden has failed again.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *