“ There never was a good war or a bad peace, ” wrote Ben Franklin at the end of the American Revolution.
Yet that depends on the war-makers and the causes for which they combat.
Six months into the war in Ukraine, released by Russian President Vladimir Putin on Feb. twenty-four, when he could not get the U. S. or Kyiv to rule out admission associated with Ukraine to a NATO alliance aimed against Russia, who also appear to be the winners plus who the losers?
While Russia made gains in the east of Ukraine, the Donbas and in the South adjacent to Crimea, captured Mariupol, and turned the Sea of Azov in to a Russian lake, its failures have been massive.
The invading Russian army of February was ended in its tracks outside Ukraine’s capital of Kyiv. That army failed to capture Ukraine’s second largest city, Kharkiv, close to the Russian border. This failed to capture Odessa, the third largest city and Ukraine’s major port on the Dark Sea.
Based on Western sources, Russia has endured 75, 000 to 80, 000 casualties and is frantically recruiting, even in prisons, to get troops to replace the dead and wounded lost in Ukraine.
Putin wants to expand his army by an additional 137, 500 troops.
The particular flagship of Russia’s Dark Sea fleet, the cruiser Moskva, has been sunk. A thousand tanks and armored staff carriers have been destroyed.
The reputation of the Russian army as a near-invincible force in any land battle in Europe has been broken.
Politically, Russia has isolated itself from much of Europe, been strike with severe sanctions plus watched as Europe and NATO unite against it.
Sweden plus Finland have abandoned their own historic neutrality to become the 31st and 32nd associates of NATO.
Is Ukraine then the champion of this war?
After all, the war that the Ukraine of Volodymyr Zelenskyy has fought against a larger Russia for its freedom, independence and territorial integrity has received the admiration of much from the world.
However, in two clashes along with Russia, in 2014 and 2022, Ukraine has dropped 20% of its territory in the east and south, and Kyiv is not going to retrieve these types of lost lands before winter comes.
But if Russia has been badly bled and Ukraine has suffered irretrievable losses of land and soldiers, who then would be the winners?
And who benefits from a continuation of this war, which will provide thousands more dead plus wounded Russians and Ukrainians?
Is this new Chilly War II with The ussr, into which we may actually have plunged, in the nationwide interest of a United States that will so welcomed the tranquil end of the old Frosty War three decades ago?
Of what benefit to the U. S. will be the sending of troops towards the Baltic republics? Are all of us stronger, safer, more secure, since we have committed to fight Russian federation to defend the 830-mile Finnish-Russian border, something no Chilly Warrior of an earlier era would have dreamt of doing?
Are we better off because all the nations from the Warsaw Pact and three republics of the old USSR are now NATO allies to get whose independence we are devoted to fight Russia?
Is the revival of the Sino-Soviet pact, aimed at the West in the 1950s and now aimed at NATO and our Asian allies, something we should welcome? Have never our own post-Cold War policies contributed mightily to refreshing the old Cold War Russia-China alliance against us?
Where President Rich Nixon appeared to split Mao’s China from Russia, this generation of American frontrunners appears to have restored that hostile duopoly.
Putin was a Russian KGB agent during the Cold War. Now every member state of the former Warsaw Pact and three constituent republics of the USSR of that era are NATO allies of the United States.
This is the new Cold War. Is Putin alone responsible for igniting it?
Perhaps greatest among our goals in the first Cold War with Russia was the avoidance of the hot war that could elevate to a nuclear war plus destroy both nations.
Now that we are once again in a hostile state associated with relations with Moscow as we were then, how can this be the result of a successful international policy?
In the first Cold War, Far eastern Europe and the Baltic States were accepted as satellites of the Soviet Union. Communism had been imposed upon them all after World War II.
But that was not a result in for military conflict in between us.
When we brought virtually all of Eastern Europe into NATO, we were the ones, not Putin, who seem to made their independence associated with Moscow and alliance with all the West a matter that we committed ourselves to go to war.
Since Russians and Ukrainians eliminate one another in the Donbas, plus hatred of Russians with regard to Americans grows, how is great for the USA?
Perhaps we ought to invest as much time and energy trying to end this war as we perform to defeat and humiliate Russia, which will not provide us peace.