It does not matter. What I'm talking about is psychological as much as
material. American arms played a pivotal role in stopping and defeating
the soviets in Afghanistan (it also turned Al Quida into a force that came
back to haunt America, but that's something else entirely). But if Putin
can be convinced that Ykpaina could be a repeat of the fatal blow that the
USSR received (and that wound is still very real for many Russians), then
we have a very powerful tool here to exploit. The stinger missile (+
whatever has emerged since) in the hands of fired up Ukrainian will cause
Putin to shit his pants. It would be game over for him if it ever happened.
On Sunday, March 23, 2014, Pavlo Ivanchenko <[email protected]> wrote:
> The question one should ask is: does Ukraine need arms from America or
does she have enough arms of her own to defend the country??? If the nation
still has a sizeable military and reserve force with sufficient equipment,
arms and ammunition then she does not need any arms from any country.
Should Ukraine choose to buy certain special weapons then the world is the
market for them. But if the nation is sufficiently armed then there is no
need to receive arms from America.
>
> PI
>
> On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 6:27 PM, Bohdan Wynnyckyj <[email protected]>
wrote:
>>
>> IF the US Congress passes a resolution clearly stating that in the event
that Russia invades eastern Ukraine, we will arm Ukrainians to defend
themselves - along with a clear message to Putin to "remember Afghanistan,"
it would be a watershed moment. Much more powerful than the sanctions of
last Thursday. He would have to be completely deranged to press on with any
plans to roll the tanks at that point.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sunday, March 23, 2014, <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
http://gazeta.ua/articles/life/_u-kongresi-ssa-zaklikayut-nadati-ukrayini-zbroyu-dlya-zahistu-vid-agresiyi-rosiyi/548679
>> >
>> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Apr 01 2014 - 00:58:58 EST