U.S. Intel Chief Gives Pessimistic View Of Ukraine War

She probably got a good talking to from the White House after this

U.S. intel chief warns of ‘devastating’ impact of Russian missile attacks

Joe Biden Ice Cream AfghanistanPresident Biden’s chief intelligence adviser raised fresh concerns Thursday night that Russian missile attacks are having a “devastating” impact on the Ukrainian economy, noting that the war has already reduced the country’s gross domestic product by nearly one-third.

Wait, if the war is as damaging as we’ve been told, how is their GDP only down one-third? Why does the U.S. taxpayer need to be dumping tens of billions every couple months into Ukraine?

Speaking during a question-and-answer session at the Lyndon B. Johnson Presidential Library, Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines said U.S. officials so far “do not see any reduction in the resolve of the Ukrainians to fight this war.”

But at the same time, Haines seemed to offer a more sobering view of the conflict than most Biden administration officials have shared to date. She said the “brutal” missile attacks on Ukrainian infrastructure are taking a far bigger toll than has been publicly understood.

Haines touted the administration’s declassification of intelligence last year that revealed Russia’s intentions to invade Ukraine during a period when European allies were skeptical that President Vladimir Putin would actually go through with it. And she said the U.S. has continued to provide important tactical battlefield intelligence to the Ukrainian military.

Well, with Trump in the White House Putin wasn’t making moves. Biden comes in and shows his weakness, especially with his disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal, and Putin is emboldened.

But she also described the war as having devolved into a “grinding conflict” where the movements are in “hundreds of meters.” The frontlines, she noted, have mostly remained “relatively static” even while the Russians press an offensive in the eastern Donbas region in which they have made “very incremental progress.”

So, essentially, the Biden position that Ukraine is slowly winning is a load of mule fritters. It looks like Putin is trying to grind it out and not destroy everything in the country they’re looking to take over. Putin knows that the West will only back Ukraine for so long before the citizens tire of funding this.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

6 Responses to “U.S. Intel Chief Gives Pessimistic View Of Ukraine War”

  1. Dana says:

    Our distinguished host wrote:

    Well, with Trump in the White House Putin wasn’t making moves. Biden comes in and shows his weakness, especially with his disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal, and Putin is emboldened.

    Thing is, President Trump was at least questioning the value of NATO, though mostly in terms of how little the European countries were contribution to alliance defense. Mr Trump was not a big fan of warfare, and began the negotiations for the withdrawal from Afghanistan. He did, however, allow covert deployments of a few thousand American troops into Syria, so he was hardly perfect. But had Russia invaded Ukraine while he was President, I think it far less likely that he would have given Ukraine the support that the dummkopf from Delaware has.

    It was less Joe Biden showing weakness than showing ineptitude. And Russia invaded on its own timetable, not on who was President of the United States.

    Actually, I thought the invasion very poorly timed. It was too late in winter, meaning that the springtime rasputitsa, or mud time was too close, and not close enough to summer, when the roads would be mostly dry again. Remember: it wasn’t just the Russian winter which so hurt the Germans; it was the autumn rasputitsa which hindered their movement as well.

    President Biden is doing everything he can to show strength here. It’s not a problem of him being too weak; it’s a problem now of the failure to consider the consequences of increasing the probabilities of nuclear war.

  2. UnkleC says:

    I see the Ukraine War as a turf battle between the Crips and the Bloods, no ‘good guys’ and little threat to civilization if not encouraged. The only beneficiaries are Biden’s (and the D’s) money laundry operation and the ‘Military-Industrial Complex’.

  3. Professor Hale says:

    The US government is making the payroll for the entire Ukrainian government right now. That is not a sign of a healthy economy. It is a charity case.

  4. H says:

    Putin will not stop if he takes Ukraine. Stop the bully in the beginning.
    Putin must realize that the threat of nuclear war will not stop nations from defending Ukraine
    “All that is necessary for evil to triumph, is for good men to do nothing”
    Putin must be stopped
    Xi will not be allowed to take Taiwan
    Hitler should have been stopped early but too many rightwingers allowed him to go forward

  5. H says:

    Poor people who are in a constant money struggle often think their own primary motivations(money) are the same as others (Biden Clintons)
    Neither spent their lives primarily accumulating money
    The Clintons have 2 homes one bought for 1.5 million and one in D C. The bought for 4.5 million. Neither Bill nor Hillary seem to actually enjoy spending money. They don’t own fancy cars or boats or planes, all things that the people who accuse them of corruption are deemed lacking by their accusers in their own lives.
    The Clintons have pledged to give 90% of their wealth to charity when they die and they choose to live more modestly than the must

    • L.G.Brandon!, L.G.Brandon! says:

      (Biden Clintons)
      Neither spent their lives primarily accumulating money

      You’re being silly again. How would you know how much money they’ve “accumulated”? They have all kinds of charities, foundations and other tax shelters. Hell, at one point the “Clinton Foundation” was said to hold over $100 million.

      You said they have $6 million in homes? Do you? That makes them part of the 1%. So now you back the 1%?

      Aside from the fact they don’t need cars, boats or planes since they are provided for them either by the government (we taxpayers) or their “friends” to gain access their primary interest is accumulating power. They seem to do that quite well.

Pirate's Cove