Give me one good reason we should defend Ukraine (enemy, CNN, soldier)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The one reason and possibly only reason : The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances co-signed by the United States, Russia and the United Kingdom. The memorandum included security assurances against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan. As a result, between 1994 and 1996, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons. Until then, Ukraine had the world's third-largest nuclear weapons stockpile.
Well to be fair, did Biden hand deliver a list to Putin of countries to leave alone? You know like he did with the list of hands off of infrastructures he’s not allowed to cyberattack?
Disclosure: Am a refugee from communism, an emigre to the US, a naturalized citizen, and a veteran.
In his memoir "From Third World To First", Lee Kuan Yew said that if the US was not in SE Asia, aka 'The Vietnam War', most of Asia would be under Chinese rule by now, meaning by the time of his memoir. US 'intervention' in Viet Nam gave the rest of Asia time to politically and militarily prepared. That 20 yrs presence forced China, and lesser the Soviet Union, to pause their expansionist plans.
The argument is that had the US/NATO not been so interested in Ukraine, maybe Putin would not act the way he did. But that argument is at best speculative. If not NATO, Putin would find another reason. Saddam Hussein wanted Kuwait so he used lateral drilling to justify Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. Historically speaking, countries do not need external causes to create internal justifications to invade and they do not stop until an external force compelled them to stop.
Geographically, Ukraine may not be an immediate concern for the US but it is for Europe, so how many countries do we 'give up' to Russia before that one country became an immediate concern for the US? Will Putin be satisfied with just one buffer/client state in the Ukraine? Then who is willing to bet his/her political life on that? And if his/her gamble turned out wrong, then it will be his/her country that will become the next buffer/client state for Russia.
We do not have to (yet) be in Ukraine the way we were in Viet Nam. For now, for Ukraine and Taiwan, there is the 'porcupine' option, meaning we arm both countries to the point where Russia and China are compelled to perform the usual cost-benefits analyses. The calculus for success have always been 3:1 ratio, but that is not confined to numbers of soldiers, tanks, ships, and so on. That calculus includes what the opponent can inflict in terms of damages, and whether the army can replace those damages to maintain that 3:1 ratio until a successful conquest. So for now, the military-industrial-complex can still make money by exporting their wares to Ukraine. We indirectly 'defend' Ukraine. Then we wait and see if we have to directly defend whatever countries are left.
So one answer to the question is 'naivete' as in we would be naive in light of history to believe that Russia (Putin) would stop at Ukraine.
Ronald Reagan, a republican president, called Russia an "evil empire." Vladimir Putin is arguably the biggest threat to the United States. Vladimir Putin HATES America, and he would do anything to see our country crumble.
And yet far-right conservatives seem to be completely in support of Russia these days. It's kind of scary.
Far-right conservatives will jump on any bandwagon if they think it will improve their chances of seizing power and putting this country under their boot. Up to and including kissing the rear end of a vile despot like Vladimir Putin.
Make no mistake this issue is all the doing of Vladimir Putin and The Kremlin. Russia continues to turn away from agreements that have kept the peace across the European continent for decades. And it continues to fixate on and threaten NATO--- a defensive, voluntary alliance that protects nearly a billion people across Europe and North America--- and threaten the governing principles of international peace and security that all the countries have a stake in defending.
Those doctrines & principles, that were established after 2 world wars and a long cold war, state one country does not have the right to change the borders of another by force. One country is not permitted to dictate to another the policies it wants or the choices it makes, including with whom to associate or join. And one country cannot make efforts and take actions to dominate and crush its neighbor nations.
World leaders agree "To allow Russia to violate those principles with impunity would drag us all back to a much more dangerous and unstable time, when the continent and Berlin were divided in two, separated by no man’s lands, patrolled by soldiers, with the threat of all-out war hanging over everyone’s heads. It would also send a message to others around the world that these principles are expendable, and that, too, would have catastrophic results."
The United States and our allies and partners in Europe are focused on what’s happening in Ukraine because it's bigger than a conflict between two countries. It’s bigger than Russia and NATO. It’s a crisis with global consequences, and it requires global attention and action.
In good faith the USA and our NATO allies have diplomatically been trying to address the continued and escalating "claims" Russia makes. Putin has not engaged, because the claims he makes about weapons and bases are not genuine and the issue is not about what he says they are. What this is about is the sovereignty and self-determination of Ukraine and all nations. It’s about Russia’s rejection of a post-Cold War Europe that is whole, free, and at peace.
Last edited by corpgypsy; 01-26-2022 at 01:09 PM..
Far-right conservatives will jump on any bandwagon if they think it will improve their chances of seizing power and putting this country under their boot. Up to and including kissing the rear end of a vile despot like Vladimir Putin.
He called the Soviet Union an evil empire. The Soviet Union has since collapsed. Liberals war mongering and obsession against Russia is lunacy.
And Putin wants to put the Soviet Union back together. He's on a power trip not unlike other dictators around the globe - but he has a bigger army.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest
Just a bunch of hysterical PuTiN mAn BaD!!!
You mean he's not bad? Really? What's so admirable about Putin?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
