Excellent article Paul Mason.

Yes, this is a powerful change in the war with Lloyd Austin's statement. I think of it as an overstatement of U.S. objectives and although is fine for now, a weakened Russia to that degree may not be in our or anyones long term interest.

Our goal may be better limited to law and order. Ousting Putin from every square inch of Ukraine and the sovereign country secured from future attacks from Putin (or his successor).

A question is: Can the Ukrainian forces, even being supplied with whatever from the West, actually achieve that objective? if we have doubts about this then we should immediately engage the full force of NATO.

Of course, we should have done this initially, but we couldn't (even now would be difficult). We in America had NO popular willing in that trust account because it was spent (to put it kindly) on two less important adventures in Afghanistan and Iraq. The other determining factor was the passion of Ukrainians and their willingness and ability to fight. The latter condition is certainly apparent and the former maybe.

I have stressed in my writing the importance of separation of Putin and Putin's Russia from Russia and its people -- who have already been conquered by Putin . We don't benefit from walling off Russia and all the things it has to offer including oil and gas. We are already increasing the height of the wall between the U.S. and China in an imagined sense of security and prosperity when neither is real.

Many thanks.