US has no good options in Ukraine

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO we need elder statesmen to be involved in some type of diplomatic resolution (and maybe they are, behind the scenes) Obama, Clinton, Bush, even Jimmy Carter. We need seasoned experienced leaders to get involved and behind this.

You are joking.
The same "seasoned experienced leaders" who have got us where we are?

I agree this administration has failed in its efforts. And, it makes me angry.
They didn't enact sanctions soon enough.
They didn't send lethal arms to Ukraine for their defense soon enough, even though they had weeks if not months to do this.
They are still buying oil from Russia.
These are the same people who planned the withdrawal from Afghanistan, so I was not optimistic.

But, most of the people you listed are not any more capable of dealing with Russia. Remember Hillary's "reset" with Russia? Remember what happened to Crimea under Obama?
And, Jimmy Carter? Probably the worst in terms of decision making when it comes to foreign policy?
No thanks.

Most of the things you suggest would have rapidly and needlessly escalated the situation. Also would have made it impossible for US to rally support from around the world and would have antagonized China.

We can't keep overstretching ourselves in conflicts around the world. The painful reality is that our leadership has to make very tough choices. I think Biden and team have handled this very well thus far.

BS. The situation escalated on Putin's timeline because we didn't act.
You are believing the narrative this administration is spinning because they have been utter failures.

The US was warning the world that Putin was going to invade, and no one believed them. Plenty of people on this site didn't believe it. How much could the US have done at that point?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO we need elder statesmen to be involved in some type of diplomatic resolution (and maybe they are, behind the scenes) Obama, Clinton, Bush, even Jimmy Carter. We need seasoned experienced leaders to get involved and behind this.

You are joking.
The same "seasoned experienced leaders" who have got us where we are?

I agree this administration has failed in its efforts. And, it makes me angry.
They didn't enact sanctions soon enough.
They didn't send lethal arms to Ukraine for their defense soon enough, even though they had weeks if not months to do this.
They are still buying oil from Russia.
These are the same people who planned the withdrawal from Afghanistan, so I was not optimistic.

But, most of the people you listed are not any more capable of dealing with Russia. Remember Hillary's "reset" with Russia? Remember what happened to Crimea under Obama?
And, Jimmy Carter? Probably the worst in terms of decision making when it comes to foreign policy?
No thanks.

Most of the things you suggest would have rapidly and needlessly escalated the situation. Also would have made it impossible for US to rally support from around the world and would have antagonized China.

We can't keep overstretching ourselves in conflicts around the world. The painful reality is that our leadership has to make very tough choices. I think Biden and team have handled this very well thus far.

BS. The situation escalated on Putin's timeline because we didn't act.
You are believing the narrative this administration is spinning because they have been utter failures.

The US was warning the world that Putin was going to invade, and no one believed them. Plenty of people on this site didn't believe it. How much could the US have done at that point?

Once Putin made the decision to invade, there was nothing the US could have done. Sending in troops to Ukraine would have led to Russians shooting at US soldiers, and vice versa. Does anyone really want the countries that hold the world’s two largest nuclear arsenals shooting at each other?

Honestly, we should have been more aggressive with Putin after he annexed Crimea. The US and European response to that was weak and sent the message to Putin that he could escalate and the response would not be anything he couldn’t handle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO we need elder statesmen to be involved in some type of diplomatic resolution (and maybe they are, behind the scenes) Obama, Clinton, Bush, even Jimmy Carter. We need seasoned experienced leaders to get involved and behind this.

You are joking.
The same "seasoned experienced leaders" who have got us where we are?

I agree this administration has failed in its efforts. And, it makes me angry.
They didn't enact sanctions soon enough.
They didn't send lethal arms to Ukraine for their defense soon enough, even though they had weeks if not months to do this.
They are still buying oil from Russia.
These are the same people who planned the withdrawal from Afghanistan, so I was not optimistic.

But, most of the people you listed are not any more capable of dealing with Russia. Remember Hillary's "reset" with Russia? Remember what happened to Crimea under Obama?
And, Jimmy Carter? Probably the worst in terms of decision making when it comes to foreign policy?
No thanks.

Who then? Who is capable of high level diplomacy with an end goal of de-escalation?

I’m interested in hearing your thoughts.

Of course it's Trump telling Putin he can have it without firing a shot. Also, btw, the US is leaving NATO.

That's their view of an "elder statesman" who cut & runs.

Trump's view is that Biden/Harris are weak, incompetent, and corrupt.

I don't believe Trump wants Putin to take Ukraine!

Good lord, you’re either dumb or naive. What do you think Giuliani, Manfort, and Prince we’re doing in Ukraine? They were meeting with Russian-aligned Ukrainians and Russian spies to figure out how to divide up the country. That was the entire end game for Ukraine.

^^Conspiracy theorists come in all colors.

I thought Trump was in Moscow being peed on by Russian women?

[Anonymous]

I think that we should learn that the U. S. And Western Europe can’t and should not support secession and create small nations in Europe. The 1900s bs should not have continued in the 1990s.
Now you have broken Empires, states that have existed for 30 years and multi ethnic states that just can’t function.
This is not to excuse the invasion, nothing justifies what Russia is doing.
On the other hand nothing justified what the Western world has been doing for hundreds of years to rest if the world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think that we should learn that the U. S. And Western Europe can’t and should not support secession and create small nations in Europe. The 1900s bs should not have continued in the 1990s.
Now you have broken Empires, states that have existed for 30 years and multi ethnic states that just can’t function.
This is not to excuse the invasion, nothing justifies what Russia is doing.
On the other hand nothing justified what the Western world has been doing for hundreds of years to rest if the world.

How did the US and Western Europe support the creation of small nations? Ukraine is the result of the break up of the USSR. Ukraine existed as an SSR, just as Russia did. What should the US/Western Europe have done after the USSR fell, to prevent all the SSRs from becoming independent countries?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that we should learn that the U. S. And Western Europe can’t and should not support secession and create small nations in Europe. The 1900s bs should not have continued in the 1990s.
Now you have broken Empires, states that have existed for 30 years and multi ethnic states that just can’t function.
This is not to excuse the invasion, nothing justifies what Russia is doing.
On the other hand nothing justified what the Western world has been doing for hundreds of years to rest if the world.

How did the US and Western Europe support the creation of small nations? Ukraine is the result of the break up of the USSR. Ukraine existed as an SSR, just as Russia did. What should the US/Western Europe have done after the USSR fell, to prevent all the SSRs from becoming independent countries?

I think you need to get some history background on this region, it's very complicated and there is no easy solution or an answer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that we should learn that the U. S. And Western Europe can’t and should not support secession and create small nations in Europe. The 1900s bs should not have continued in the 1990s.
Now you have broken Empires, states that have existed for 30 years and multi ethnic states that just can’t function.
This is not to excuse the invasion, nothing justifies what Russia is doing.
On the other hand nothing justified what the Western world has been doing for hundreds of years to rest if the world.

How did the US and Western Europe support the creation of small nations? Ukraine is the result of the break up of the USSR. Ukraine existed as an SSR, just as Russia did. What should the US/Western Europe have done after the USSR fell, to prevent all the SSRs from becoming independent countries?

I think you need to get some history background on this region, it's very complicated and there is no easy solution or an answer.

Can you identify anything I said in my post that is incorrect? Telling me “it’s very complicated” is a cop-out. Explain to me how the US & Western Europe are responsible for the creation of Ukraine as an independent state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO we need elder statesmen to be involved in some type of diplomatic resolution (and maybe they are, behind the scenes) Obama, Clinton, Bush, even Jimmy Carter. We need seasoned experienced leaders to get involved and behind this.

You are joking.
The same "seasoned experienced leaders" who have got us where we are?

I agree this administration has failed in its efforts. And, it makes me angry.
They didn't enact sanctions soon enough.
They didn't send lethal arms to Ukraine for their defense soon enough, even though they had weeks if not months to do this.
They are still buying oil from Russia.
These are the same people who planned the withdrawal from Afghanistan, so I was not optimistic.

But, most of the people you listed are not any more capable of dealing with Russia. Remember Hillary's "reset" with Russia? Remember what happened to Crimea under Obama?
And, Jimmy Carter? Probably the worst in terms of decision making when it comes to foreign policy?
No thanks.

Most of the things you suggest would have rapidly and needlessly escalated the situation. Also would have made it impossible for US to rally support from around the world and would have antagonized China.

We can't keep overstretching ourselves in conflicts around the world. The painful reality is that our leadership has to make very tough choices. I think Biden and team have handled this very well thus far.

BS. The situation escalated on Putin's timeline because we didn't act.
You are believing the narrative this administration is spinning because they have been utter failures.

The US was warning the world that Putin was going to invade, and no one believed them. Plenty of people on this site didn't believe it. How much could the US have done at that point?

+1 we talked about it at our book group a month before the invasion. Biden took away the element of surprise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IMO we need elder statesmen to be involved in some type of diplomatic resolution (and maybe they are, behind the scenes) Obama, Clinton, Bush, even Jimmy Carter. We need seasoned experienced leaders to get involved and behind this.

You are joking.
The same "seasoned experienced leaders" who have got us where we are?

I agree this administration has failed in its efforts. And, it makes me angry.
They didn't enact sanctions soon enough.
They didn't send lethal arms to Ukraine for their defense soon enough, even though they had weeks if not months to do this.
They are still buying oil from Russia.
These are the same people who planned the withdrawal from Afghanistan, so I was not optimistic.

But, most of the people you listed are not any more capable of dealing with Russia. Remember Hillary's "reset" with Russia? Remember what happened to Crimea under Obama?
And, Jimmy Carter? Probably the worst in terms of decision making when it comes to foreign policy?
No thanks.

Who then? Who is capable of high level diplomacy with an end goal of de-escalation?

I’m interested in hearing your thoughts.

Of course it's Trump telling Putin he can have it without firing a shot. Also, btw, the US is leaving NATO.

That's their view of an "elder statesman" who cut & runs.

Trump's view is that Biden/Harris are weak, incompetent, and corrupt.

I don't believe Trump wants Putin to take Ukraine!

Good lord, you’re either dumb or naive. What do you think Giuliani, Manfort, and Prince we’re doing in Ukraine? They were meeting with Russian-aligned Ukrainians and Russian spies to figure out how to divide up the country. That was the entire end game for Ukraine.

^^Conspiracy theorists come in all colors.

I thought Trump was in Moscow being peed on by Russian women?

Maybe he was. Who knows, and at this point who cares? But Manafort was advisor to Putin's stooge in Ukraine, and Trump was impeached for withholding Congressionally mandated aid to Ukraine. So it's not much of a stretch to think that Trump was cool with Russia doing whatever it wanted with Ukraine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that we should learn that the U. S. And Western Europe can’t and should not support secession and create small nations in Europe. The 1900s bs should not have continued in the 1990s.
Now you have broken Empires, states that have existed for 30 years and multi ethnic states that just can’t function.
This is not to excuse the invasion, nothing justifies what Russia is doing.
On the other hand nothing justified what the Western world has been doing for hundreds of years to rest if the world.

How did the US and Western Europe support the creation of small nations? Ukraine is the result of the break up of the USSR. Ukraine existed as an SSR, just as Russia did. What should the US/Western Europe have done after the USSR fell, to prevent all the SSRs from becoming independent countries?

Google is your friend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that we should learn that the U. S. And Western Europe can’t and should not support secession and create small nations in Europe. The 1900s bs should not have continued in the 1990s.
Now you have broken Empires, states that have existed for 30 years and multi ethnic states that just can’t function.
This is not to excuse the invasion, nothing justifies what Russia is doing.
On the other hand nothing justified what the Western world has been doing for hundreds of years to rest if the world.

How did the US and Western Europe support the creation of small nations? Ukraine is the result of the break up of the USSR. Ukraine existed as an SSR, just as Russia did. What should the US/Western Europe have done after the USSR fell, to prevent all the SSRs from becoming independent countries?

I think you need to get some history background on this region, it's very complicated and there is no easy solution or an answer.

Can you identify anything I said in my post that is incorrect? Telling me “it’s very complicated” is a cop-out. Explain to me how the US & Western Europe are responsible for the creation of Ukraine as an independent state.

Everything in your post is incorrect. The West directly participated and encouraged the creation of new states.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that we should learn that the U. S. And Western Europe can’t and should not support secession and create small nations in Europe. The 1900s bs should not have continued in the 1990s.
Now you have broken Empires, states that have existed for 30 years and multi ethnic states that just can’t function.
This is not to excuse the invasion, nothing justifies what Russia is doing.
On the other hand nothing justified what the Western world has been doing for hundreds of years to rest if the world.

How did the US and Western Europe support the creation of small nations? Ukraine is the result of the break up of the USSR. Ukraine existed as an SSR, just as Russia did. What should the US/Western Europe have done after the USSR fell, to prevent all the SSRs from becoming independent countries?

I think you need to get some history background on this region, it's very complicated and there is no easy solution or an answer.

Can you identify anything I said in my post that is incorrect? Telling me “it’s very complicated” is a cop-out. Explain to me how the US & Western Europe are responsible for the creation of Ukraine as an independent state.

Everything in your post is incorrect. The West directly participated and encouraged the creation of new states.

The West directly participated in the fall of the USSR? Certainly we wanted it to happen and we encouraged it, but how did we directly participate in it? The USSR failed in large part due to critical internal economic and political problems, as well as the failed Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that we should learn that the U. S. And Western Europe can’t and should not support secession and create small nations in Europe. The 1900s bs should not have continued in the 1990s.
Now you have broken Empires, states that have existed for 30 years and multi ethnic states that just can’t function.
This is not to excuse the invasion, nothing justifies what Russia is doing.
On the other hand nothing justified what the Western world has been doing for hundreds of years to rest if the world.

How did the US and Western Europe support the creation of small nations? Ukraine is the result of the break up of the USSR. Ukraine existed as an SSR, just as Russia did. What should the US/Western Europe have done after the USSR fell, to prevent all the SSRs from becoming independent countries?

I think you need to get some history background on this region, it's very complicated and there is no easy solution or an answer.

Can you identify anything I said in my post that is incorrect? Telling me “it’s very complicated” is a cop-out. Explain to me how the US & Western Europe are responsible for the creation of Ukraine as an independent state.

Everything in your post is incorrect. The West directly participated and encouraged the creation of new states.

DP: Then it should be easy to point out what was wrong.

Btw Ukraine has shown pretty conclusively that it is a separate country and is functional as a State. Russia on the other hand looks like a complete mess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that we should learn that the U. S. And Western Europe can’t and should not support secession and create small nations in Europe. The 1900s bs should not have continued in the 1990s.
Now you have broken Empires, states that have existed for 30 years and multi ethnic states that just can’t function.
This is not to excuse the invasion, nothing justifies what Russia is doing.
On the other hand nothing justified what the Western world has been doing for hundreds of years to rest if the world.

How did the US and Western Europe support the creation of small nations? Ukraine is the result of the break up of the USSR. Ukraine existed as an SSR, just as Russia did. What should the US/Western Europe have done after the USSR fell, to prevent all the SSRs from becoming independent countries?

I think you need to get some history background on this region, it's very complicated and there is no easy solution or an answer.

Can you identify anything I said in my post that is incorrect? Telling me “it’s very complicated” is a cop-out. Explain to me how the US & Western Europe are responsible for the creation of Ukraine as an independent state.

DP, but you don’t know what you are talking about. The smaller countries that gained sovereignty after the breakup of the USSR, Yugoslavia, and Czechoslovakia are all doing fine except for the few being menaced by Russia. None of them want to go backwards. The US didn’t force any of them to become independent nations. It’s what they wanted and in some cases what the fought for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that we should learn that the U. S. And Western Europe can’t and should not support secession and create small nations in Europe. The 1900s bs should not have continued in the 1990s.
Now you have broken Empires, states that have existed for 30 years and multi ethnic states that just can’t function.
This is not to excuse the invasion, nothing justifies what Russia is doing.
On the other hand nothing justified what the Western world has been doing for hundreds of years to rest if the world.

How did the US and Western Europe support the creation of small nations? Ukraine is the result of the break up of the USSR. Ukraine existed as an SSR, just as Russia did. What should the US/Western Europe have done after the USSR fell, to prevent all the SSRs from becoming independent countries?

I think you need to get some history background on this region, it's very complicated and there is no easy solution or an answer.

Can you identify anything I said in my post that is incorrect? Telling me “it’s very complicated” is a cop-out. Explain to me how the US & Western Europe are responsible for the creation of Ukraine as an independent state.

DP, but you don’t know what you are talking about. The smaller countries that gained sovereignty after the breakup of the USSR, Yugoslavia, and Czechoslovakia are all doing fine except for the few being menaced by Russia. None of them want to go backwards. The US didn’t force any of them to become independent nations. It’s what they wanted and in some cases what the fought for.

Yes, that’s what I said.