The War of the Spanish Succession lasted from 1701 to 1714. It was, in a sense, the first world war in that it involved fights in Europe, Asia and the Americas as a coalition led by Great Britain fought to curb the ambition of France under Louis XIV. In the much-smaller population of the time, it still carried off via war and disease about 2 million people.
Thing is, the war actually ended in August of 1704. That was when an Anglo-Dutch force captured Gibraltar and secured British control over the Mediterranean Sea. After that, it was just a lot of fighting with no major strategic shifts until a peace of exhaustion was secured in 1714…with Britain retaining control of the one prize of the war: Gibraltar (still under British rule to this day).
It is often like that: wars going on after the issue has been decided. This is invariably because the side that lost doesn’t want to admit it and so keep smashing their skull against the stronger, victorious side.
World War Two? It ended in June of 1942 with the Japanese defeat at Midway. It is understandable once you realize that the only path to Axis victory was keeping the American military out of Europe. For all FDR’s commitment to the “Europe first” strategy, he wouldn’t have been able to carry it out if Midway had been lost, Hawaii conquered and the west coast under attack from Japanese carrier battle groups. Without full commitment by the USA to Europe, the Anglo-Russian alliance would have been insufficient to overcome Germany (side note: if we had been defeated at Midway that wouldn’t 100% mean we lost the war – we could build ships faster than the Japanese and so we might have retrieved the situation…but for Japan, and thus for the Axis, Midway was do or die; Japan lacked the resources to replace the equipment and men lost when 4 fleet carriers went down during that battle). Midway won, FDR could keep his promise…and an American army landed in North Africa just five months after Midway. In a sane world, Germany and Japan would have sued for peace no later than January of 1943.
So, too, other wars. The Civil War was over when Vicksburg surrendered in 1863. World War One was over for Germany when they lost the Battle of the Marne in 1914…doubly over when their gamble at Verdun in 1916 was drowned in blood. So, why bring this up? Because the issue in Ukraine is not who is right or wrong, braver, more noble…the issue is this: is this war already over?
In my view, it is. Ended before it even started. After Putin invaded Ukraine in 2014 and clearly indicated that he considered Ukraine to be Russian, it was time for Ukraine to pursue one of two courses of action:
- Appeasement of Russia.
- Building a military force so potent that it could immediately respond to Russian aggression in an absolutely devastating manner.
Ukraine pursued neither of these options. They lived on in a sort of dream world where a corrupt and incompetent Ruling Class passed out bribes to foreign influencers and hoped that the mere thought that Ukraine would become part of NATO would deter Russian aggression. This obviously was a very bad idea – it is clear now that building up a military force was the best option as the war has revealed Russia’s astonishing military incompetence. This really shouldn’t have surprised us…we should have figured that 70 years of Communist rule had pretty much wiped out all decent and courageous elements in Russia and the dregs of Stalin’s GULAG weren’t going to be very good (side note: they weren’t very good in WWII, either: Russia’s victory was gifted to them by Hitler’s incompetence…and even then the Russians lost a couple million more than necessary simply because the Russian leadership used blood rather than thought to get at the Germans).
But all of that is past. Can’t change it. But what we also can’t change is the battle lines. For example:
And then:
Notice that the lines have not moved in any significant way in two years. Nobody really knows how many have died in the war as both sides lie quite egregiously about it. Best estimates are about 2 million total casualties and this would indicate given normal killed to wounded ratio that about 700,000 are dead and 1.3 million wounded, some significant number of those wounded permanently crippled. All credit to the Ukrainian military for at least stopping the Russians from taking over the whole country…but there’s no further point in fighting. It is just going to get more people killed and likely not change anything…with the understanding that if this becomes a genuine war of attrition, Russia will win due to superior numbers and eventually conquer the whole country. It is highly unlikely that Putin wants to draft enough Russians to do that…so, once again, back to nothing ever changing.
Peace now based on current lines of control is the best option. And I’m talking full peace. No ceasefire: an actual treaty between Russia and Ukraine ratified by both sides which cedes Russian-controlled territory to Russia but also commits Russia to no further territorial claims against Ukraine. Such a thing won’t actually stop Russia but it puts to bed Putin’s theory that Ukraine is Russian and should be part of Russia. It would be an admission by a Russian government that it really doesn’t have title to Ukraine. And then Ukraine can start to build that first-rate army they should have built after the 2015 ceasefire. Of course, I don’t know if Ukraine has any better military material in their population than Russia does – they, too, are the dregs of Stalin’s GULAG. But they can at least try – and very likely a force even a little bit better than Russia’s will whack the Russians pillar to post if it comes to it. The idea here is for Ukraine to have a force in being – instantly ready to go – which can both defeat an oncoming Russian invasion and rapidly move the conflict onto Russian territory…so when the battle lines stabilize it is Ukraine holding the whip hand. This is just Weaker Country Strategy 101, guys. I’m not suggesting something new. It is how the IDF trounced the combined forces of the Arab world in four different wars.
I’m naturally bringing this up because of the meeting today between Trump and Zelenskyy. Yes, a lot of NeoCons are very upset about it. I’m not. Zelenskyy has been playing a role and getting the aid and its all been quite useless…and then he had the idiotic idea of campaigning for Harris in Pennsylvania. This will go down as one of the most bone-headed moves in diplomatic history…the foreigner seeking aid always strokes both sides of the political divide. The Israelis know to keep lines open to both Republicans and Democrats and never overtly engage in partisan American politics. When the life or death of your country is at stake, you swallow your pride and do what’s best for your country…not what’s best for a partisan photo-op. So, today Trump and Vance raked Zelenskyy over the coals. Fully deserved and the best way to get to a peace deal…the Ukrainians had to learn that they’re not talking their butts out of this one…more aid may be forthcoming, but peace is the objective here, not another four years of war.
And this is yet another example of us getting back into the real world. The pretend world is Slava Ukraini! with the brave and heroic Zelenskyy in his fatigues fighting the Russians in the trenches. The real world is that Zelenskyy is an entertainer promoted way above his pay grade, his fatigues are a costume and the trenches are running red with blood. Maybe the Ukrainians really do want to fight on – we don’t know as Zelenskyy cancelled the elections so there’s no way to assess Ukrainian opinion on the matter. But whatever on that – it is their country and their blood. If they want to keep fighting then God bless…do your best. But without our money and weapons. I don’t want to risk a hot war with Russia in the center of Europe over the Donbas…not when we’re $37 trillion in debt, our armed forces are very weak, our manufacturing capacity anemic and China is building a blue water navy.
Blogs For Victory 
I haven’t heard the expression used since I was young, but back in the day Zelenskyy would have been referred to as a pipsqueak.
I saw him on Fox afterwards and his demand is that we first issue a security guarantee – basically, another open-ended commitment of American blood and treasure. To me, that’s a non-starter. I don’t even like our open-ended commitment in Korea but at least its explicable in strategic terms…Ukraine? Can’t see it. I don’t think Trump sees it, either.
I fully understand why Zelenskyy wants that guarantee – he knows that it’ll likely keep Russia coming back for more and will relieve the pressure for reforms to the Ukrainian military and society which would be unpopular (that is expensive, time consuming; maintaining an active ground army of at least 500,000 for the foreseeable future – and side note on that, South Korea maintains an active force of 500,000 across all branches and has reserves totaling 3.1 million…this is why I remain ok with our alliance with Korea…if a fight comes, they’re in it powerfully right from the get go).
To me, the first task of diplomacy here is to find out Putin’s price for peace – we should be pressing for it, either actual or implied. If he’ll only make peace with a disarmed Ukraine lacking any allies, then that merely shows he’s prepping to grab more. That isn’t a deal worth taking. But if it works out to peace along current lines of control, that is reasonable and should be taken.
I see our role in the future of Ukraine as being a source of military equipment and training – so, any deal we make with Ukraine has to have a massive component of Ukrainian military force and they pay us both what we’ve already given and what we’re going to give. This, as Trump has pointed out, would give us a vested interest in the future independence of Ukraine. I would be ok with entering a security treaty with Ukraine – but consultive, not conclusive. Akin to Britain’s Entente Cordiale with France prior to WWI. We’re here. We recognize the threat. But final commitment will be dependent upon American strategic needs at the time – and no US forces will be based in Ukraine during peacetime.
The bottom line is that I don’t want permanent enmity with Russia. They are very much a second-rate power but they would be tremendously useful if friendly to us during a Sino-American conflict. A mere glance at the map shows why – a Russia friendly to us (and fearful of eventual Chinese designs on Siberia if America is knocked down from global dominance) would tie up an incalculable but very large number of Chinese troops. Same thing if we have an understanding with India (Vietnam, as well). Ultimately, the way to keep a Chinese army out of Taiwan (and the Philippines and even Japan) is to have that army tied down elsewhere. And key to that tie down is a friendly Russia. So, no, I don’t want to overly offend Russia…so, yes, I will agree to Russia’s annexation of the Donbas. Foreign affairs are bleakly realistic and you do what you have to do.
I’m loving everything going on but honestly it’s hard to keep up. I think about commenting on an issue but by the time I formulate an opinion, 5 more things have happened. Also, the speed of what is getting done is crucial, considering we only have about 18 months before midterms get in the way, so both Holman and Musk need to hit the accelerator.
What happened in the Oval Office today was beautiful. Zelenskyy is a little boy in over his head who thinks he can keep the gravy train rolling with no accountability. Those days are over. Trump is offering him an excellent deal that will ensure Ukraines safety and prosperity for generations, but Zelensky is either too stupid or too much of a grifter to take it. Here’s another fact about that war, Putin already has what he wanted, and that is the eastern flank that runs down and connects with Crimea. If Putin wanted Kyiv, he would already be there. Russia has 10x the troops Ukraine does, it’s just no contest. People are being killed right now for no purpose.
I’m loving everything going on but honestly it’s hard to keep up.
But it’s fun!
I just heard NY Gov Kathy Hochul say that she “has a lot of people with dental problems” when discussing health care on MSNBC. Question, is it the Governors responsibility to take care of citizens who need dental care? Is this the type of governance Democrats want? We are not the same with these people. They are not Americans.
Yeah, I’ve heard that Meth does a number of your teeth.
Part of our challenge is ending the notion that government is a benevolent benefactor capable of legislating fairness and well being that so many Americans now believe in. Government is a necessary evil, when run properly it’s seemless, and when run improperly it becomes an obstruction.
I just settled a nuisance lawsuit (my favorite legal term for this kind of thing is “vexatious”) and during the mediation I was constantly reminded, by my legal team and the retired trial judge handling the mediation, that the law has nothing to do with justice.
A few years ago I heard a relatively famous evangelical personality say “the federal government is not supposed to play a role in virtue” or a very similar phrasing. I distinctly remember his use of the word “virtue” in explaining what the federal government is supposed to be responsible for, or rather, NOT responsible for. He went on to detail the actual, real, Constitutional duties of the federal government, and pointed out that none of them has anything to do with virtue. They are all elements in the framework of a system that exists only to provide a national identity, provide a way to have national defense, and organize the relationships among the many individual and separate governments we call “states”. The purpose of the federal government is just to provide an umbrella of protections and basic rules under which the individual states, local governments and citizens can function.
It has nothing to do with “fairness” or “virtue” or, as James Madison said, “charity”.
In a way this comes back to the Leftist concept of collective justice, collective salvation and collective redemption. I can’t remember exactly how Obama put it, but he once made a comment about how “we” needed to do something to earn salvation. It’s a common Leftist concept.
But this entire nation is based on rejection of collectivism and central authority. The Judeo-Christian ethos is one of individual redemption, salvation and forgiveness, and our government model is an emphatic rejection of Central Authority (whether it is called a monarchy or a dictatorship or just Democratic Socialism) with a focus on personal responsibility and local governance.