The Situation in the Ukraine. #13

Seriously can we get rid of this troll?

Insulting people, trolling and not contributing to this forum...

Werewolf wrote:Seriously can we get rid of this troll?

Insulting people, trolling and not contributing to this forum...

Just ignore him. Getting offended makes it look like he has actually posted something worth paying attention to.
He may as well be a bot, posting the same retarded NATO propaganda talking points over and over.

sepheronx wrote:

Werewolf wrote:

etaepsilonk wrote:

GarryB wrote:

They are being shelled every day though. Not a good situation for the people there.

And that is not the fault of Kiev.... it is Putins fault... riiiiiiiight...

Ukrainians shell Ukrainians in the Ukraine and it is the president of Russias fault?

Well, he does contribute by sending weapons to fuel the conflict...

Sure you low life troll, sending weapons to protect russia for its existence is fueling the war...russia has buinsess there, the west never will have buisness there.

You know, I know, we all know what US goal is. In the end, Russia will be completely surrounded by US and NATO, and if a war does not start, it will allow US to easily influence Russia and Russians, and convince them to break apart Russia. So Russia could never again be a power. And US has been quite successful due to Russias gross incompetence. No, it isnt in Russias place to take care of other nations economically, but if they do not want to be invaded in multitude of ways, they will need to start taking care of other nations like US does.

Now Russia has a rather large "brotherly" nation at its borders willing to help US invade it. While Putin and Co sit on their collective asses and do f all.

People here say Putin won. What has he won? He lost another nation, at his borders, that will gladly host US bases and is openly hostile to Russia. That sounds like a MAJOR defeate to me. I fear for Russias future.

You are sadly mistaken.  Ukraine was lost in 1991 and not on Putin's watch.

1) Putin had no way of stopping the brainwashing of a whole generation by Ukraine's corrupt oligarch mass media.
This brainwashing is central to the whole crisis.

2) Russia was and still is in no position to use force to impose its will.   This is a critical point too.   Washington is
so cocky because it knows that the cards are stacked in its favour.  If Russia sends troops to the Donbas it will
be a major NATO propaganda victory and will put Russia on the defensive for a long time.   The maggots in Washington
will screech about Russian invasions and aggressions for decades.   Currently, they sound like idiots when they try
to push this propaganda line and are slowly losing the propaganda war around the world and even at home.

3) You break it, you buy it.   By sending forces into Ukraine Russia will "own" Ukraine's problems.   The Kiev regime
will have a major gift "validating" all of its lies and getting all the brainwashed Ukr sheep to herd more tightly around it.
Instead it is now sinking together with the ship called Ukraine.   The economic and hence political collapse of Ukraine
is the only tool Russia has and it is the best tool by far.  It will sour brainwashed Ukrs on the propaganda they consume
24/7 and wake some of them up.   No Russian invasion could hope to achieve this and in fact would achieve the opposite.

4) All the talk of Russia doing nothing is BS.   Russia has enabled the Donbas rebels to survive and secure themselves.
This is a major achievement.  The 10,000 volunteers, supply lines and big power political support (e.g. you don't see
any NATO air campaign as you saw in Kosovo and Libya) is to be applauded.   Given the constraints on Russia it is an
big achievement.   Russia can only help to the extent that it can and not to fantasy dreams of internet forum members.
It has nothing to be ashamed of.

UAF reports 3 UAF soldiers KIA and 17 more WIA yesterday.

I suppose, the Minsk 2 should have a specififc timeline that specifies doing exactly what at what times, that is, do election at this particular time, do ceasefire at this particular time, do federaliztaion at this particular time. Instead, we are left with a Minsk 2 that does not specify doing what at what times, so every day it seems nothing happens and people lob shells at each other every day and on one does or says anything about it.

sepheronx wrote:

Werewolf wrote:

etaepsilonk wrote:

GarryB wrote:

They are being shelled every day though. Not a good situation for the people there.

And that is not the fault of Kiev.... it is Putins fault... riiiiiiiight...

Ukrainians shell Ukrainians in the Ukraine and it is the president of Russias fault?

Well, he does contribute by sending weapons to fuel the conflict...

Sure you low life troll, sending weapons to protect russia for its existence is fueling the war...russia has buinsess there, the west never will have buisness there.

You know, I know, we all know what US goal is. In the end, Russia will be completely surrounded by US and NATO, and if a war does not start, it will allow US to easily influence Russia and Russians, and convince them to break apart Russia. So Russia could never again be a power. And US has been quite successful due to Russias gross incompetence. No, it isnt in Russias place to take care of other nations economically, but if they do not want to be invaded in multitude of ways, they will need to start taking care of other nations like US does.

Now Russia has a rather large "brotherly" nation at its borders willing to help US invade it. While Putin and Co sit on their collective asses and do f all.

People here say Putin won. What has he won? He lost another nation, at his borders, that will gladly host US bases and is openly hostile to Russia. That sounds like a MAJOR defeate to me. I fear for Russias future.

What do you suggest how Russia should react in this situation? Maybe Putin is just simply pretending to sound soft and diplomatic? Back in 2007 he sounded more vocal and firm against washington in his speeches compared now, and Russia is far more capable these days compared then, i wonder why?

kvs wrote:

sepheronx wrote:

Werewolf wrote:

etaepsilonk wrote:

GarryB wrote:

They are being shelled every day though. Not a good situation for the people there.

And that is not the fault of Kiev.... it is Putins fault... riiiiiiiight...

Ukrainians shell Ukrainians in the Ukraine and it is the president of Russias fault?

Well, he does contribute by sending weapons to fuel the conflict...

Sure you low life troll, sending weapons to protect russia for its existence is fueling the war...russia has buinsess there, the west never will have buisness there.

You know, I know, we all know what US goal is. In the end, Russia will be completely surrounded by US and NATO, and if a war does not start, it will allow US to easily influence Russia and Russians, and convince them to break apart Russia. So Russia could never again be a power. And US has been quite successful due to Russias gross incompetence. No, it isnt in Russias place to take care of other nations economically, but if they do not want to be invaded in multitude of ways, they will need to start taking care of other nations like US does.

Now Russia has a rather large "brotherly" nation at its borders willing to help US invade it. While Putin and Co sit on their collective asses and do f all.

People here say Putin won. What has he won? He lost another nation, at his borders, that will gladly host US bases and is openly hostile to Russia. That sounds like a MAJOR defeate to me. I fear for Russias future.

You are sadly mistaken.  Ukraine was lost in 1991 and not on Putin's watch.

1) Putin had no way of stopping the brainwashing of a whole generation by Ukraine's corrupt oligarch mass media.
This brainwashing is central to the whole crisis.

2) Russia was and still is in no position to use force to impose its will.   This is a critical point too.   Washington is
so cocky because it knows that the cards are stacked in its favour.  If Russia sends troops to the Donbas it will
be a major NATO propaganda victory and will put Russia on the defensive for a long time.   The maggots in Washington
will screech about Russian invasions and aggressions for decades.   Currently, they sound like idiots when they try
to push this propaganda line and are slowly losing the propaganda war around the world and even at home.

3) You break it, you buy it.   By sending forces into Ukraine Russia will "own" Ukraine's problems.   The Kiev regime
will have a major gift "validating" all of its lies and getting all the brainwashed Ukr sheep to herd more tightly around it.
Instead it is now sinking together with the ship called Ukraine.   The economic and hence political collapse of Ukraine
is the only tool Russia has and it is the best tool by far.  It will sour brainwashed Ukrs on the propaganda they consume
24/7 and wake some of them up.   No Russian invasion could hope to achieve this and in fact would achieve the opposite.

4) All the talk of Russia doing nothing is BS.   Russia has enabled the Donbas rebels to survive and secure themselves.
This is a major achievement.  The 10,000 volunteers, supply lines and big power political support (e.g. you don't see
any NATO air campaign as you saw in Kosovo and Libya) is to be applauded.   Given the constraints on Russia it is an
big achievement.   Russia can only help to the extent that it can and not to fantasy dreams of internet forum members.
It has nothing to be ashamed of.

Reading this, I have a question. I hope it makes sense. I agree, a frozen conflict is in Russia's favor. & if Ukraine, etc can not win militarily, at what point does the ATO (if it does) tip over the edge, and cost Kiev government more than it's "Partners" are willing to pay (in whatever terms)?? What would be the tipping point where they would be willing to cut Donbass area loose, and forget controlling their border with Russia? or will that never happen??

sepheronx wrote:

I wouldnt say they should have invaded, but should have made sure that if they truly had a hand in with Yanukovich, that forced him to stay and actually deal with the protestors, rather than running. Add in that, they should have help build up the pro Russian parts of Ukraine so that western part wouldnt have easily break through like they had. And finally, ban those piece of crap NGO's who are funding these organizations and problems. Even venezuela is acting against them. Russia has a lot more money and power than most think. But they dont us it or show it. And now, they have a real problem.

If East stays part of Ukraine as a republic, what gives you the idea that they will have any say? The western part will still end up with NATO bases and it will still end up part of NATO regardless, and eastern part as well, and Russia gain nothing and lose all. It would be in Russias interest to start officialy helping Novorussia, even if it just helps create a buffer zone. Moscow is real real close to these areas and is now an even easier target, both moscow and st.petersburg. it is a major mistake that Russia has invested so much in these cities and regions, cause they will be the first to be wiped out. They should have invested eastwards back then.

Even shoigu suggested moving the capital to Siberia. He is correct.

Edit: as foe the brainwashing and lies, it is already too late. The invasion would definately prove them right, but even if they dont invade, they are "right". In other words, Russia has already "invaded as far as western Ukrainians are concerned, Europe and US. Sitting back and being blamed already, isnt a tactic, not one a winner plays. So they lost to Europe and US, and officialy have a very hostile, soon to be nato or having us bases on it, righ on a very very very long and close border to its capital. Russia lost big time. They need to act. Invasion or not. But if they dont, they are in major trouble. Pakistan can influence a lot more than Russia with having no money it seems. While Russia cant at all?[/quote]


Maybe Russia thought that Crimea need an excuse to leave Ukraine and join Russia??

Karl Haushofer wrote:

Flagship Victory wrote:Intense firefight. NAF using small arms and a 23 mm AA gun because not allowed to use heavy weapons because of Minsk. UAF using mortars and ATGM not restricted by Minsk. This differential in heavy weapons NAF not allowed to use UAF allowed to use puts NAF at a significant disadvantage Thanks Putin. Can't wait for Putin to be out of office. 3 more years. Yes We Can!  

Is it really true that Putin is hostile to Novorossiya and preventing Novorossiya a fair fight against the Kiev junta? What is his motive? It seems strange that Putin would wish a defeat for Novorossiya since it would be terrible for Russia and Russia's security.

To a certain degree Putin is hostile to Novorossiya. Novorossiya was started by Strelkov who went to Donbas without permission from Putin. Strelkov started uprising in Donbas and re established Novorossiya. Putin sends the message that he is the president, not Strelkov or anyone else. So Putin's goal is to destroy Novorossiya. The Minsk agreement only does 1 thing, and that is aid Ukraine destroy Novorossiya. With Minsk, NAF is not allowed to go on the offensive to capture the oblast borders, and not allowed to use heavy weapons while Ukraine is allowed with Putin's blessing. Putin know, once Obama is out of office, the US will ship tons of weapons to Ukraine to destroy Novorossiya. This way, Putin can use Ukraine to destroy Novorossiya and send the message, DON'T EVER DO ANYTHING WITHOUT MY APPROVAL, without having to use the Russian army to destroy Novorossiya.

sepheronx wrote:The amount Russia lost and the MASSIVE security and integrety issue Russia suffered greatly outweighs gains from Crimea.

What Putin did with Crimea was an impulsive move. Kiev was like a friggin war zone back then. Fire everywhere. Right Sector thugs shooting police officers. Once things calmed down, Putin's rage subsided and Putin started referring to Ukraine as Russia's brother nation once again. That's why Putin wants to destroy Novorossiya.

sepheronx wrote:Which is a very anti Russian thing to do. Clearly they are either idiots or traitors cause Ukraine is calling for death of Russians, yet Russia gladly helps Ukraine get by.

Pathetic. Putin hopefully gets voted out so someone with a spine moves in. Tells Kiev to screw itself, pay full price for gas, and provide open assistance to Lugansk and Donentsk.

What does Putin do when the putch regime massacres thousands of civilians right off Russia's border? Nothing. What does Putin say? Nothing. What did Iran do when the US invaded Iraq? Iran armed and trained Mahdi Army which eventually drove out the Americans. Heck, Ukraine pretty much isn't even in Russian news these days anymore even though hundreds of civilians continue to die from the putch regime's indiscriminate shelling every month.

sepheronx wrote:
.........................................................

Edit: as foe the brainwashing and lies, it is already too late. The invasion would definately prove them right, but even if they dont invade, they are "right". In other words, Russia has already "invaded as far as western Ukrainians are concerned, Europe and US. Sitting back and being blamed already, isnt a tactic, not one a winner plays. So they lost to Europe and US, and officialy have a very hostile, soon to be nato or having us bases on it, righ on a very very very long and close border to its capital. Russia lost big time. They need to act. Invasion or not. But if they dont, they are in major trouble. Pakistan can influence a lot more than Russia with having no money it seems. While Russia cant at all?

You are missing the point here and being a but panicky.

Ukraine never was one entity and best thing about current situation is a chance to finally and once and for all  figure out which parts of  the "Ukraine" are friendly and which ones are hostile.
Friendly ones get cooperation and protection,  hostile ones get their spot on nuclear target roster. Simple as that...

USA cannot establish foothold in one half of the Ukraine and ignore other half like you suggest Doing so would mean officially splinting the Ukraine in several pieces which would be exactly what Russia wants. Ukraine (and western credibility) is spinning down the toilet. Let them spin.

Russia talk softly now because they can finally afford to (and will be even more so in the future) and they are letting Washington and Brussels constantly make idiots of themselves by repeating stupid rhetorics ad-nauseum.  
This is same approach that West used with Sovs in Cold War. Irony is so delicious here.  

As for US military in Ukraine, keep this in mind: any conflict that threatens Russia proper will instantly go nuclear. Any ABM shield (which will never work to begin with) in Ukraine can be bypassed simply by relocating Russian ICBMs deeper inland. But it is a plan B or C. Not to mention all other factors that favor Russia in that scenario.
This ABM talk from Russia is more about principles rather than actual treat.
Why hurry when you can achieve same goal with less effort?        

Russia needs to act cool, keep improving their finances and build national unity like they are doing now. They can let West do their work for them by wasting money, time and reputation on their own. If you haven't noticed EU is more divided than ever and look more stupid than ever- all this Russia accomplished by acting calm and cool.

And it is still early day yet. Like I said before- money wins wars.

sepheronx wrote:
Even shoigu suggested moving the capital to Siberia. He is correct.

Yes he is, but not for security reasons (like I said: threat to Russia= Nuclear war) although that would not hurt either.
Moscow is performing too many functions ATM. Moving capitol to Novosibirsk (for example) would lighten the load on Moscow and facilitate economic and structural development of central Russia.
It would be very beneficial move.

What if Putin is just bluffing? Maybe when he said Ukraine is a brotherly nation it was intended for those ukrainians who still hold pro russian views? While at the same time he is working on a plan for the total callapse and disintegration of Ukraine, it would be easier to absorb parts of ukraine that way

sepheronx wrote:

Flagship Victory wrote:

sepheronx wrote:Which is a very anti Russian thing to do. Clearly they are either idiots or traitors cause Ukraine is calling for death of Russians, yet Russia gladly helps Ukraine get by.

Pathetic. Putin hopefully gets voted out so someone with a spine moves in. Tells Kiev to screw itself, pay full price for gas, and provide open assistance to Lugansk and Donentsk.

What does Putin do when the putch regime massacres thousands of civilians right off Russia's border? Nothing. What does Putin say? Nothing. What did Iran do when the US invaded Iraq? Iran armed and trained Mahdi Army which eventually drove out the Americans.

Pretty much. screw Putin. he isnt a hitler, but he is an idiot.

Exactly. Khamenei is 1000 times the man compared to Putin. I'm not anti Russia or anti Russians. But Putin as a president of the Russian people, I think bad choice. I think, a few years from now, both Georgia and Ukraine would become NATO countries and then the US will start on Belarus uprising.

Cowboy's daughter wrote:

kvs wrote:
You are sadly mistaken.  Ukraine was lost in 1991 and not on Putin's watch.

1) Putin had no way of stopping the brainwashing of a whole generation by Ukraine's corrupt oligarch mass media.
This brainwashing is central to the whole crisis.

2) Russia was and still is in no position to use force to impose its will.   This is a critical point too.   Washington is
so cocky because it knows that the cards are stacked in its favour.  If Russia sends troops to the Donbas it will
be a major NATO propaganda victory and will put Russia on the defensive for a long time.   The maggots in Washington
will screech about Russian invasions and aggressions for decades.   Currently, they sound like idiots when they try
to push this propaganda line and are slowly losing the propaganda war around the world and even at home.

3) You break it, you buy it.   By sending forces into Ukraine Russia will "own" Ukraine's problems.   The Kiev regime
will have a major gift "validating" all of its lies and getting all the brainwashed Ukr sheep to herd more tightly around it.
Instead it is now sinking together with the ship called Ukraine.   The economic and hence political collapse of Ukraine
is the only tool Russia has and it is the best tool by far.  It will sour brainwashed Ukrs on the propaganda they consume
24/7 and wake some of them up.   No Russian invasion could hope to achieve this and in fact would achieve the opposite.

4) All the talk of Russia doing nothing is BS.   Russia has enabled the Donbas rebels to survive and secure themselves.
This is a major achievement.  The 10,000 volunteers, supply lines and big power political support (e.g. you don't see
any NATO air campaign as you saw in Kosovo and Libya) is to be applauded.   Given the constraints on Russia it is an
big achievement.   Russia can only help to the extent that it can and not to fantasy dreams of internet forum members.
It has nothing to be ashamed of.

Reading this, I have a question. I hope it makes sense. I agree, a frozen conflict is in Russia's favor. & if Ukraine, etc can not win militarily, at what point does the ATO (if it does) tip over the edge, and cost Kiev government more than it's "Partners" are willing to pay (in whatever terms)?? What would be the tipping point where they would be willing to cut Donbass area loose, and forget controlling their border with Russia? or will that never happen??

I would not say a frozen conflict is in Russia's favour. It's hands are tied and it can only hope that an economic collapse of
Ukraine precipitates true regime change. Ukraine's GDP has fallen by 17.6% officially for the 1st quarter of 2015. In spite
of all the hater trash talk from western Ukraine, the east was a major part of Ukraine's GDP. Donetsk and Lugansk by themselves
accounted for 25.6% of Ukraine's exports. The Kiev regime cut off vital trade with Russia. Russia needs to milk this action
for all it is worth. NATO is not going to fill the gap in the near or medium term.

kvs wrote:I would not say a frozen conflict is in Russia's favour.  It's hands are tied and it can only hope that an economic collapse of
Ukraine precipitates true regime change.   Ukraine's GDP has fallen by 17.6% officially for the 1st quarter of 2015.   In spite
of all the hater trash talk from western Ukraine, the east was a major part of Ukraine's GDP.  Donetsk and Lugansk by themselves
accounted for 25.6% of Ukraine's exports.  The Kiev regime cut off vital trade with Russia.   Russia needs to milk this action
for all it is worth.   NATO is not going to fill the gap in the near or medium term.  

Economy is nothing but a number in a digital computer these days. Don't expect Ukraine to collapse economically. Maidan was never about the economy. It was about getting rid of neutral, not even pro Russia factions in Ukraine, overturning the non alignment clause in the constitution, and joining NATO. That was what Maidan was all about. And it was funded by the US government.

What should Russia do now? A full scale invasion?

AbsoluteZero wrote:What should Russia do now? A full scale invasion?

Not a full scale invasion. Send arms to NAF like how Iran armed Mahdi Army which drove Americans out of Iraq. Guns, bullets, artillery, shells, ATGMs, don't need tanks, jet, helicopters. With arms, NAF can fight to oblast borders. Without Donetsk and Lugansk, Ukraine would be weakened to the point other regions will also up rise, places like Kharkov and Odessa and Kherson. Domino effect. A pro Russia government would take power in Kiev if Putin arms NAF. This is what I'd do if I were president of Russia.

If Putin continues his current strategy, then after 2016 the next US president will arm Ukraine which would then destroy Novorossiya. At that point, Ukraine would join NATO and American tanks would be parked right on Russia's border.

Ukraine and the West would gladly let Russia take Donbass. It's not their first choice but if that's what Russia wanted the deal would be quickly made. Most of Russian population would in that situation vanish from Ukraine, and it would be easy to make of the country the most fascist and russophobe place in the world. Putin knows this and that's why he will never recognize Donbass as independent or make it part of Russia. At least not in the present form. If one day Novorossiya becomes independent or joins Russia it will happen with much bigger territory under it's control, you can be sure about that. This game has just begun and nothing is lost. At present Russia loses if they let rebels be overrun or if current territory controlled by rebels becomes independent of Ukraine. On the other hand West and their puppets in Kiev lose if Donbass is part of Ukraine but has an autonomy, meaning if Minsk is implemented. They know that they will lose if it's implemented so it will not be implemented unless situation on the ground forces them to do it. So war will most likely continue sooner or later.

About Nato bases in Ukraine, again it will never happen in Ukraine as we know it know. Maybe it happens in much smaller Ukraine, that will have much smaller border with Russia but in Ukraine as it is it will never happen. If Russia senses that things are going in that way they will send the army to Kiev no matter the cost, I have no doubt about that. So this talk about bases and that East won't have any say is not really serious talk. If they won't have any say than what's stopping the West and Kiev from implementing the Minsk deal? Well, because they know that pro Russian Donbass with an autonomy would be like an antivenom spreading all over Ukraine and blocking their poison of hate to take root. Russia is playing the long game, trying to get what it wants without taking big risks or breaking with the West. For Russia and Russians everywhere the best solution would be for Donbass to have autonomy and be part of Ukraine. Ideally that can be achieved peacefully but most likely it will have to be achieved by force with victory in battles until something breaks in Ukrainian society, their ruling class and today's rulers will then be deposed. When hopefully that happens Russia will achieve a complete victory in Ukraine and it would have a much better situation than before all this happened. She would have gained Crimea, Donbass would have an autonomy, the rest of Ukraine would be sick of West and full of disappointment and they wouldn't be able to organize new Maidan for decades because of it if ever.

Nikander wrote:Ukraine and the West would gladly let Russia take Donbass. It's not their first choice but if that's what Russia wanted the deal would be quickly made. Most of Russian population would in that situation vanish from Ukraine, and it would be easy to make of the country the most fascist and russophobe place in the world. Putin knows this and that's why he will never recognize Donbass as independent or make it part of Russia. At least not in the present form. If one day Novorossiya becomes independent or joins Russia it will happen with much bigger territory under it's control, you can be sure about that. This game has just begun and nothing is lost. At present Russia loses if they let rebels be overrun or if current territory controlled by rebels becomes independent of Ukraine. On the other hand West and their puppets in Kiev lose if Donbass is part of Ukraine but has an autonomy, meaning if Minsk is implemented. They know that they will lose if it's implemented so it will not be implemented unless situation on the ground forces them to do it. So war will most likely continue sooner or later.

About Nato bases in Ukraine, again it will never happen in Ukraine as we know it know. Maybe it happens in much smaller Ukraine,  that will have much smaller border with Russia but in Ukraine as it is it will never happen. If Russia senses that things are going in that way they will send the army to Kiev no matter the cost, I have no doubt about that. So this talk about bases and that East won't have any say is not really serious talk. If they won't have any say than what's stopping the West and Kiev from implementing the Minsk deal? Well, because they know that pro Russian Donbass with an autonomy would be like an antivenom spreading all over Ukraine and blocking their poison of hate to take root. Russia is playing the long game, trying to get what it wants without taking big risks or breaking with the West. For Russia and Russians everywhere the best solution would be for Donbass to have autonomy and be part of Ukraine. Ideally that can be achieved peacefully but most likely it will have to be achieved by force with victory in battles until something breaks in Ukrainian society, their ruling class and today's rulers will then be deposed. When hopefully that happens Russia will achieve a complete victory in Ukraine and it would have a much better situation than before all this happened. She would have gained Crimea, Donbass would have an autonomy, the rest of Ukraine would be sick of West and full of disappointment and they wouldn't be able to organize new Maidan  for decades
because of it if ever.

Donbas is not a small piece of land. About as big as each of the Baltic states. Ukraine would never give up territory. Even if Donbas is razed to the ground, Ukraine will never give up Donbas. Tom Cruise has a good line in the 1992 movie Far and Away when he said land is the most valuable thing in the world, no one will give you land. Indeed, humanity has fought over land over hundreds of thousands of years. You'd imagine Putin is foolish for not wanting Donbas when the people of Donbas wanted to join Russia in May 2014.

There are already American troops in Ukraine. The US knows, with US troops in Ukraine, Russia won't dare to invade Ukraine because Russia won't fight a war with the US. Therefore, once the US starts putting military bases in Ukraine, then it's pretty much guaranteed Ukraine would join NATO.