mtutiger

And that's fine, peace talks should be an aspiration in all of this. I just don't think the conditions exist as of right now for successful peace talks to actually happen, as it will require a level of trust that doesn't exist and will require the parties to sit down, negotiate in good faith, and be willing to make some sacrifices. None of those conditions are being met.... obviously there is a process ongoing, but at the end of the day, the Ukrainians don't trust the Russians, the Russians have shown little evidence of acting in good faith since the start of this conflict and the Russians haven't come down much from their initial demands (essentially capitulation). Would something that leads to less death and destruction be a good development? Obviously.... but one would have to weigh the odds of success (low) with the costs of failure (pretty high, considering the idea of breaching trust and roiling fellow NATO membership)

This is a big reason we differ. I would suggest that the Ukrainians, who themselves are engaged in peace talks with Russia as we speak, understand the lay of the land just fine.... probably better than we do given their proximity to the fighting, frankly. In general, I just think that a lot of this view that we just need to explain things better and the fighting might end comes from the position that we are a major player in this conflict when we really are not. Which makes sense because we all see things through an American lens.... but ultimately how this plays out is going to be contingent on the Russians and the Ukrainians. The uncertainty sucks, but it is what it is.

Bringing out the big guns for Bally Sports lol

Yet another "Biden is a disaster because I think Biden is a disaster" post from ol' Archie. Shocking. I would ask Archie what he would do differently from how the United States has responded to date, but I'm sure we'll get crickets as per usual.

Do you believe that recent estimates of Russian KIA from our Department of Defense (around 7k) are "propaganda numbers"? People who are experts in the field who have been pretty impartial in analyzing the conflict, such as Michael Kofman, seem to put some stock in these estimates. And if they are true, they are still pretty bad for Russia.

Oh sure, it could be more short term than anything.... Either way, it's pretty clear that doing business with Putin seems like a non-starter at this point. We'd have to cross that bridge when we get there with whatever would follow him in your the hypothetical case that he were overthrown.

He doesn't need to be replaced with a pro-Westerner to he a significant upgrade at this point

Even on the low end of 7k, NATOs estimate released yesterday paints a pretty grim picture.

I dont think you understand my point at all. We aren't "allowing" Ukraine to fight... they would be fighting regardless of whether we are providing support, whether moral or in weapons. So I do not see any upside whatsoever in giving them (and Poland and the Baltics) the middle finger because we feel inconvenienced by this conflict. What tools do you suggest exactly? And just because tools are offered doesn't mean they will be accepted.

Fair point, I guess I would want to pursue strategies that support our allies and support Ukraine in their fight for self determination. Not a strategy with little to no chance of succeeding that would burn bridges with our allies and the Ukrainians fighting for self determination. Either way, there is this distinctly American mentality that we hold a bunch of cards in all foreign policy situations and that it'd be easy to just sit the two parties down and hammer out a deal. When in reality, ceasefires between two countries who hate each other are extremely hard to accomplish and require more from the two parties involved than us, who technically aren't even involved. The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict from 2020 (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_2020_Nagorno-Karabakh_war) isa great example: it took multiple attempts at ceasefire to ultimately get one... during the US attempt to get one, the ceasefire lasted all of 30 mins before falling apart. The war only ended once Azerbaijan captured a key city and led Armenia/Artsakh to capitulate. Simply put, this conflict is more likely than not going to last as long as Vladimir Putin wishes it to last and Ukraine chooses to resist. The whole world doesn't revolve around us.

Agreed. It's one thing if we say it, another if the government says it.

Exactly... I'm also unclear what leverage we have to bring about a different result... sanctions didn't stop Russia from invading, but ending sanctions will magically lead them to a ceasefire? And the Ukrainians... we could theoretically tell 40 million people to lay down their arms, but the more likely result is they respond by saying that they are the ones who are under invasion and that the US can go pound sand.

This would be pretty terrible on a number of levels... it would basically come with massive risks of alienating the Ukrainians, who are a much larger stakeholder in this conflict than we are for obvious reasons, with very little chance of gain. On top of the fact that it isn't clear that Russia is even interested in dealing with us, the Ukrainians now largely hate the Russians with a fiery passion... how on earth can we assume that we can push either of these countries on a whim? And then there's the matter of NATO... what would Poland or the Baltics think? They all view this conflict (correctly) as existential. It would irreparably damage NATO by leading to questions about members' commitments to mutual self defense. Biden has handled this well and he should continue to give the Ukrainians space to drive peace negotiations. Not everything that happens in the world revolves around us, nor should it.

He called out John Kennedy yesterday for his phoney Foghorn Leghorn routine as well.... People like to rag on Sasse, but that clip of him talking about cameras shows that he's a lot more self-aware about how dysfunctional his body is than almost everyone else in his caucus.

Absolutely, you gotta keep those guys logging innings... that doesn't happen if they are in Detroit. Guys like Will Vest or Miguel Diaz or (gulp) Joe Jimenez, that's where your competition is for the final bullpen spots.

Willi is gonna get bumped, and I suspect that someone like Will Vest is more likely than Wentz to be in a bullpen role

Aside from Baddoo, Greene and Tork, can't think of another position player who has made the impression he has thus far.

His initial press conference (where he expressed that he doesn't seen or done much baseball over the offseason) suggests that he's not quite in form yet. May be the same with Fulmer, don't know.

Kreidler with the Grand Slam!

Velocity down in the low 90s....

Man, E-Rod has been nasty thus far....

I missed this from earlier, but Belarus invading seems like a shaky proposition for Lukashenko

I get it. I guess my point is that the Senate doesn't have to work this way and, collectively, it's the fault of the people who elect these clowns for how worthless it has become. There's a reason successful and relatively popular politicians like Chris Sununu and Doug Ducey aren't running in an otherwise great year for Republicans... the Senate isn't a place for people who want to actually accomplish things other than expelling hot air