We Can’t Let Radical Republicans Make US Bystanders to Genocide

current events, international crises, Ukraine 7 Minutes

The Ukrainians have, amazingly, defied the Russian juggernaut all this time. But as they methodically and courageously push forward to reclaim their territory and push the Russians back, voices are growing louder in the US and in Europe in opposition to continuing the absolutely essential funding.

They are voices demonstrating ignorance or indifference to history that pose a lethal threat to Ukraine, to allies such as Poland, and thus to US national security. Putin can barely contain his glee. China is watching to see if they no longer have to worry about us protecting Taiwan. We can’t let these voices for world chaos be decisive.

Why is the oft-heard phrase “It’s time to negotiate” outrageous? The thoughts I’ve had were just confirmed by Anne Applebaum, a journalist who’s a Russia expert living in Poland. She was interviewed by former Senator Al Franken on his often informative and stimulating podcast.

First, lest anyone wonder how the Ukrainians can continue this grueling pace as the numbers of their dead and wounded mount, the answer is they can’t stop because it isn’t only their own lives and the lives of their loved ones at risk: it is the existence of their nation.

When Applebaum used the term “genocide,” Franken pressed her to explain how this war makes that word applicable.

Putin has never believed Ukraine was a nation with a people who have an identity, she said. He thought there would just be Zelensky and a few others who would object to the Russian invasion, but found there were 30 million. His goal is to “Russify” the country, destroying its language, culture, national identity.

That’s why the Russians have kidnapped and deported so many children—the actions that were the grounds for the International Criminal Court’s condemning Putin as a war criminal. The children are given to Russian families and indoctrinated into hatred of their real families and former homes.

At the same time, the Russian government and media refer to Ukrainians as a “virus,” parasites, lice, rats. Sound familiar? Genocide it is.

Faced with this dreadful future, the Ukrainians can’t NOT fight. And they can’t just say: “All right; take this territory and leave,” because that’s not going to happen.

Applebaum stressed that the Ukrainians have no one to negotiate with. And even if a ceasefire were in place for a while, “if they rearm, we haven’t achieved much.”

The counteroffensive is taking longer than expected, Applebaum said—in part because the Ukrainians had to wait so long for the weaponry they were promised, and in part because they have to clear land mines as they go.

One thing the Ukrainians have learned—and so has the US—is that the Russians’ nuclear weapons blackmail is a bluff. Elon Musk had claimed his refusal to allow the Ukrainians to use his Starlink system for a sea drone attack on their ships was that the Russians told him they’d respond with nuclear weapons.

But the Ukrainians told Applebaum they’d successfully attacked the Russian fleet shortly thereafter. The Russian response? They kept their ships in the harbor for weeks. That was all.

The Ukrainians can now hit almost everywhere, and they are continuing to destroy Russian targets, Applebaum said.

Thinking about the pressure for negotiation, I was moved by this segment from 60 Minutes, in which Scott Pelley interviewed Zelensky before he left for the UN and Washington.

“We spoke to Zelenskyy on Thursday. He told us that his people are dying every day to prevent World War III.”

“President Volodymyr Zelenskyy (translated): We’re defending the values of the whole world. And these are Ukrainian people who are paying the highest price. We are truly fighting for our freedom, we are dying we are not fiction, we are not a book. We are fighting for real with a nuclear state that threatens to destroy the world.”

…

“That empathy for life has Volodymyr Zelenskyy reaching out, again, to the United Nations and the United States hoping to convince the allies that the world can be safe only when Ukraine is whole…”

Pelley: Can you give up any part of Ukraine for peace?

Zelenskyy (translated): No. This is our territory. 

Pelley: You must have it all? Including Crimea?

Zelenskyy (translated): Today you and I… you said it to me… you saw me awarding people [medals]. [Well] today is a day like that. A week ago, I gave awards to parents [of soldiers who have been killed]. There were 24 families of the dead. There was a woman. She was with three children. There were parents, very old. They could barely walk and they had had only one son. One of the women was pregnant. She arrived holding a baby in her arms. And she was pregnant. And that baby will never see… what should I tell them? That all of them died so that we could say, “It’s okay, [Russia] you can take it all.” It’s a difficult job. You understand me, right? Giving awards to people whose faces show their whole world has collapsed. And all I can give them, all I can give them – is victory.”

When President Biden addressed the UN Tuesday, he spoke of many issues of importance to the entire world, dwelling on climate change in detail. He ended his speech with an appeal for strong and continuing support for Ukraine against the “illegal war of conquest, brought without provocation by Russia against its neighbor, Ukraine.”

“Like every nation in the world, the United States wants this war to end.  No nation wants this war to end more than Ukraine.

“And we strongly support Ukraine in its efforts to bring about a diplomatic resolution that delivers just and lasting peace.

“But Russia alone — Russia alone bears responsibility for this war.  Russia alone has the power to end this war immediately.  And it is Russia alone that stands in the way of peace, because the — Russia’s price for peace is Ukraine’s capitulation, Ukraine’s territory, and Ukraine’s children.

“Russia believes that the world will grow weary and allow it to brutalize Ukraine without consequence. (emphasis mine)

“But I ask you this: If we abandon the core principles of the U.N. Charter to appease an aggressor, can any member state in this body feel confident that they are protected?  If we allow Ukraine to be carved up, is the independence of any nation secure? 

“I’d respectfully suggest the answer is no. 

“We have to stand up to this naked aggression today and deter other would-be aggressors tomorrow.

“That’s why the United States, together with our allies and partners around the world, will continue to stand with the brave people of Ukraine as they defend their sovereignty and territorial integrity and their freedom. 

“It’s not only an investment in Ukraine’s future, but in the future of every country that seeks a world governed by basic rules that apply equally to all nations and uphold the rights of every nation, no matter how big or how small: sovereignty, territorial integrity.  They are the fixed foundations of this noble body, and universal human rights is its North Star.  We cannot sacrifice either.”

President Zelensky made his own powerful case before the UN (in English, which he has learned very well), first at the General Assembly, then at the Security Council, where he urged the Council to deny Russia a veto.

In the General Assembly speech, he said “Terrorists have no right to hold nuclear weapons” and warned about the Russians’ weaponization of food, energy–especially nuclear energy–and children. It’s a clear, profound speech, which you can watch above.

To me, one of the most stirring parts of his General Assembly address was his reeling off the names of all the countries that are receiving Ukrainian grain—now. It’s a long list, and it shows both the pragmatic and humanitarian aims of this brilliant man even as he sees the death and devastation of his people every day.

(I should note that this determination is not without consequences. Ukraine’s pricing the grain modestly has led its firm ally (and competitor) Poland to declare an end to sending weapons to Ukraine—at least for now.)

Zelensky made his case again in Washington, where President Biden said at the White House that the US would begin shipping Abrams tanks that the Ukrainians have been seeking and were previously promised.

But Zelensky was once again denied missile weaponry he has said is essential. The pattern has been resistance, then agreement six months later. The New York Times reported:

“Jake Sullivan, the national security adviser, told reporters that Mr. Biden would not provide ATACMS now, but that he had not taken it off the table.”

Now is not the time for dithering.

When he appeared before the Senate, where there is bipartisan support, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell joined Majority Leader Chuck Schumer in escorting him. McConnell issued a statement saying:

“American support for Ukraine is not charity. It’s in our own direct interests — not least because degrading Russia helps to deter China.”

Zelensky was blunt in speaking with the legislators: Without our funding, others will falter in their support, and Ukraine will fail.

But House Majority Leader McCarthy wouldn’t even give Zelensky the courtesy of a full House audience. McCarthy did attend a private meeting, after which Zelensky told American editors that McCarthy said the House would continue to support the Ukrainian war effort.

The Times reported:

“He [McCarthy] said that they will be on our side — it’s not simple — that they will support.”

I’m not sure why, but I have a teensy bit of trouble taking Kevin McCarthy at his word…

How sad and repulsive it is that Representatives Marjorie Taylor Greene and Matt Gaetz are the Republicans’ de facto House leaders now—as McCarthy grovels instead of leading.

It is difficult for me to accept that the aid Ukraine desperately needs to enable it to push forward will be blocked by the likes of these lowlifes and their comrades-in-anarchy.

And “comrade” feels like the appropriate word, as Donald Trump and his bestie Vlad seem to be calling the shots.

Ukraine is crying out for our government to return to its normal national security status, whereby Putin’s aggression is condemned—not rewarded.

As the House seeks to placate its mad king, I hope we’ll all make individual contributions to Ukraine if we can, and notify our elected officials that we are all in to prevent the genocide.

We like to contribute to Zelensky’s fund: https://u24.gov.ua.

Apart from the morality and basic humanity of supporting the brutalized but resilient Ukrainians’ fight for freedom, sovereignty, and the right to be a democracy, it bears repeating that the Chinese are watching us as they salivate over Taiwan, and Putin is dead set on expansion. Either or both such moves will lead to American troops’ doing what the Ukrainians are doing now.

Annie

Published by annieasksyou

I've been a nonfiction writer for many years, exploring diverse topics that pique my curiosity, as noted in my first blog posting (Greetings!). I'm seeking dialogue with others committed to joining me in this exploration, sharing my conviction that different views can be exchanged in a respectful, civil discourse where we can learn from one another and be agreeable, even when we disagree. These postings depend for their enrichment on your participation: your ideas, insights, knowledge, opinions, and personal stories.

Published

62 thoughts on “We Can’t Let Radical Republicans Make US Bystanders to Genocide”

      1. I think the Ukrainian situation may be more complicated than we realise. My friend worked in The Ukraine for years and was in Kiev during Chernobyl. I just think it is just another can of worms we seem set on opening.

        Liked by 1 person

      5. I would say it’s been more of a mixed bag, which is why Biden’s approach seems wise to me. Putin won’t stop; if he succeeded in his genocide of Ukraine, he’d turn to Poland. Then we’d have no choice about sending in our soldiers.

        Isolationism doesn’t work.

        Liked by 3 people

      8. We are continually being told who our latest enemy is. I am sick of us getting it wrong! Too many people in my family have died already fighting in pointless wars. Isn’t it time to reflect on where all our nonsense has got us? Too me this conflict is once more about egos and money. To me this is about remembering a Russian woman on a train who shared her bag of apples with us. It is about two German soldiers my family befriended following World War I. It is about an Iranian guy who gave me a clove of garlic. It is about the Moslem woman who gave me a bracelet. It is about my Jewish Republican boyfriend who gave me one of the happiest memories in my life. None of them were ever my enemy. My enemy is people of my own race who sat back and let me get beaten up!
        How about we fix problems in our own society before we impose our values on anybody else?

        Like

      9. We have the resources to do both—fight genocide without American military dying, and fix our problems at home.

        Putin may not be your enemy, but he is delighted to hear people say what you’re saying. I’m sure you don’t see things that way, but it’s clear that he is propagandizing Americans to oppose the Ukrainians’ struggle so he can roll right in.

        I am moving on now. I hope you’ll do the same. You’ve made your views very clear.

        Liked by 1 person

      10. To Remembering Lives. First, no American soldiers are fighting to help Ukraine. Second, this situation is all about values. The question is quite simple. Should the US stand by and not help the Ukrainian people who have been attacked by Putin? Many in the MAGA/ Trump movement have said :NO. The US should not support the people of Ukraine. The problem is, there is no fence to sit on. Either you support Ukraine or you support Putin. There is no middle ground. There is no gray area. Putin , using violence, took land and people (including stealing Ukrainian children) from a sovereign nation. End of story. You are free to support Putin. that is fine. But we at not free to pretend that there is a middle way. Either Putin wins by force , which justifies violence, or Ukraine remains independent. Of course no one in the US wants war. That is a given. The surest way to keep us out of war is to continue to support Ukraine with weapons and humanitarian aid. Appeasement of expansionist dictators has never worked. Look to history. There is no similarity between this invasion and the Vietnam war of the Iraq war, both of which I actively opposed. (Yes, I am that old).

        Liked by 2 people

  2. I agree with much of what you wrote, Annie. I don’t see any path to peace. More weapons on one side will inevitably lead to more weapons on the other side. Perhaps the end will come with a change in administration either here or in Russia.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. I don’t understand, William. A change in administration HERE? Are you suggesting Trump doing Putin’s bidding? I don’t see the inevitability you do. Many Americans close to the issue (Vindman, McFaul, Taylor, et al) believe if we had given Ukraine what they asked for early on, they could have driven the Russians out.

      Liked by 4 people

      Reply

      1. Why not? It could happen a year from now. Control of House and Senate, hang by a thread. Control of the White House depends on a few voters in a handful of states.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. William, I think the confusion I have—and maybe Frank as well—is that your second sentence suggests that you believe continuing to arm the Ukrainians will lead to an endless war, which none of us wants to see—least of all the Ukrainians, as President Biden said. Thus, your third sentence sounded (to me, at least) as though that situation is so undesirable that “perhaps” a change of administration “here or there” could end it. I’m quite sure you don’t want to see a Trump administration, which would end both Ukraine and our democracy, but that was my understanding of your comment.

        I am much more confident we are not facing a Trump win with each passing day and each Democratic win in special elections.

        Liked by 3 people

      4. How wars end: sometimes with a ceasefire (Korea), sometimes in a rout, a mediated settlement (Russo-Japanese War 1904-05) , an imposed settlement (Crimean War 1853-56), war may drag on for decades, or one party may tire and desist. How this one might end is obscure. Opposition is reported in America and Russia. I don’t wish for Americans to tire of it first, but clearly that’s one way it could end.

        Liked by 1 person

      5. A change in administration here could end this particular war, in the sense that a Trump administration would abandon Ukraine to conquest by Putin, just as a pro-Nazi administration in the US in 1940 could have ended the war in Europe by cutting off aid to the UK and allowing it to be beaten into submission by Hitler (in practice Ukraine would fight on as best it could without our help, as the UK would have, but survival would be far more difficult).

        However, any peace achieved by such means would be only temporary. Just as Hitler would still have invaded the USSR after defeating Britain, and Japan would still have bomber Pearl Harbor eventually (indeed, those regimes would have been emboldened by the US display of weakness in abandoning the UK), so Putin, once his goons had massacred, raped, and brainwashed the Ukrainians into submission after Trump’s criminal betrayal, would have been emboldened to go after another target — the Baltic states, or Moldova, or even Poland. He has already declared his intent to re-establish the USSR, and he would know then that the US, as long as Trump was in office at least, would remain a faithless ally, willing to abandon its commitments and appease him. The next president would face a much bigger and more dangerous and more aggressive Russian Empire, without the help of the courageous allies the Ukrainians have proven to be.

        Appeasers talk about ending wars. Realists talk about winning them.

        Liked by 2 people

  3. Hitler only wanted a small part of Czechoslovakia. Just the part that had a lot of ethnic Germans. It was naturally part of the “German fatherland”. So, they let him take it. It was of no concern to Americans.
    Hitler went to Poland . The western part of Poland was part of what had once been Prussia. A natural part of the “German fatherland”. So, he took it. Great Britain declared war. The Americans in Congress and others said it was of no concern to us.
    Hitler took Belgium, the Netherlands and France. It was necessary to protect the “German fatherland” from possible attacks. And to install the “Final Solution” to the “Jewish Question”. No concern of the US. Europe’s problem, not ours.
    Hitler tried to bomb Great Britain into submission. The US Congress said: OK, not our problem. FDR used the “lend-lease “program and other means to funnel much needed weapons to Churchill. Some of it done “illegally”. Kept Britain alive.
    Hitler finally declared war on the US, after Pearl Harbor. Only then did the US Congress agree to take action.
    I taught history for over 30 years. The ignorance of many in Congress concerning the aggression of authoritarians is sickening and frightening. Did they ever read a book? How does someone get to that level of power without a basic understanding of how dictators act? Or are they simply supporters of Putin only because Biden opposes him?
    We can be thankful that Biden supports the Ukrainians.

    Liked by 6 people

    Reply

    2. It isn’t 1939, Putin isn’t Hitler, Russia isn’t Germany, and Ukraine isn’t France. Rather than try to make history repeat itself or not, we had better think this thru anew.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      1. No, Putin’s not Hitler; he has his own kind of treachery, and he has demonstrated a lethal unwillingness to allow his neighbors to live in peace. This is genocide, and we need to voice our full-throated opposition to it. The Ukrainians have shown they’re a strong military force, putting the Russians to shame.

        Timothy Snyder, author of On Tyranny and other books, wrote that we’re currently devoting 0.3% of our defense budget in helping the Ukrainians push back the Russians; if we spent 0.6%, the Ukrainians could succeed. He cites 10 reasons to thank the Ukrainians.

        https://snyder.substack.com/p/thanking-ukrainians#details

        Liked by 4 people

    3. Exactly so. We can, and need to, learn from the mistakes made in the past. History doesn’t repeat itself exactly, but patterns often recur. Putin isn’t exactly like Hitler, but there is already plenty of rhetoric among the Russian leadership about seizing the Baltic states, subjugating Poland, etc — even while Russia isn’t winning in Ukraine — to show clearly that if Putin is allowed to win anything from his aggression in Ukraine, more aggression will follow.

      A ceasefire in Ukraine would just give Putin breathing space to rearm and resume his attack from a stronger position later. A negotiated settlement would be worse than useless since Putin will never abide by whatever terms he agrees to. Recall the Budapest Memorandum, by which Ukraine foolishly gave up its nuclear weapons in exchange for “security guarantees” from Russia, which Putin has now shown to be worth exactly as much as that piece of paper Chamberlain got from Hitler after pressuring Czechoslovakia to give up the Sudetenland (and its defensible borders).

      The longer we wait to squelch an expansionist gangster state, the more difficult the job is when we’re no longer able to avoid dealing with it. It is wisest to defeat such a regime as early in its career as possible. That’s the lesson of 1936-1939 which is eminently applicable to our situation today.

      Liked by 4 people

      Reply

      1. In Zelensky’s speech before the UN General Assembly, he referred to Ukraine’s agreement to give up its nuclear weapons as a positive move that the rest of the nations need to emulate to prevent World War 3. I support such an effort. But I think it’s clear that Putin would have been much less likely to have invaded in the first place if Ukraine had had such weaponry.

        Still, Ukraine has shown itself to be a formidable and creative fighting force that can be a bulwark for democracy in Europe. Anne Applebaum describes the sea drones, developed by the Ukrainians only recently, as a terrific innovation.

        Liked by 2 people

  4. I’m not worried we are not in the habit of abandoning allies on the battlefield Kurds excepted. No world leader misunderstands the implications in allowing territory to be taken by force. A thing that does concern me is the depth of Xerxes gold.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

      1. Yes in this era Russian gold. There is credible evidence that at least one senator has been bought. No one I know is giving odds that a former president wasn’t in the pocket and I’d put something on wager that some of that gold is motivating the discreditation of the current president.

        Liked by 2 people

    1. I do hope Zelensky soon finds a way to resolve the grain issue with Poland, Matthew. The Poles know their vulnerability in this war. And it’s important to keep the Russian atrocities in mind. War is always hell, but not all wars target civilians and kidnap children.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      1. The current grain squabble began when Ukraine sued Poland for keeping its import block against Ukrainian grain after the EU had lifted the EU-wide block. I understand Zelensky also made some disparaging remarks about Poland at the time (this was before his recent UN speech), which was foolish. Poland is well-known for the fervent nationalism of its people, Polish farmers have been holding protest demonstrations against Ukrainian grain imports (which undermine prices), and Poland happens to be in the middle of a very close national election at the moment. It was inevitable that the ruling party would react forcefully. Once the election is over, whoever wins will probably find a way back down and resume supplying arms to Ukraine. Poland better understands the menace Russia poses than any other Western country.

        Liked by 1 person

  6. From a European perspective this is another chapter in a conflict which arguably has been going on before Columbus mistook The Americas for India.
    There is a cast of characters which range from The Swedes in the North to the Ottoman Turks in the South. Along with Lithuanians, Prussians, Germans, Cossacks, Poles, any number of folk from the Hapsburg Empire, Crimean Tartars and of course Ukrainians and Russians; to name but a few. In recent centuries at the end of each episode Russia managed to come out on top and assumes it will it always will have bragging rights.
    There was always a high likelihood of international conflict along the eastern borders of Europe. It came pretty close during the break up of Yugoslavia and the aftermath. Then the touchstones were either in the Baltic, possibly Poland, The Balkans and finally, here we are.
    Thus Likelihood turns into Inevitable, with so many variables predicting an outcome is near impossible; anyway the outcome will have its own consequences; like the 1973 Arab – Israeli war.

    Of course one section of the Euro-Left still stuck with its Cold War mentality will make excuses for The Kremlin Court, sticking to its old blind mantra ‘Moscow Good. Washington Bad,’ And the Third World still bitter over the age of European Empires will selectively support or be understanding to Russia so it can thumb its collective nose at The West. Nothing new here folks.

    What might be tragically comic if it were not for MAGA and the politicians willing to dance at its behest (You’ve still not worked out your role there have you Donnie- little action figure), is the about face by the American Right. Re-wind to the 1950s /60s and if this were happening then the Republican Party to a member would be howling for intervention, even ‘boots on the ground’ in support of Ukraine against the ‘Evil Communists’.
    But of course, there are no ‘Evil Communists’ anymore. There are lots of folk rich by suspect means, investing in the American Right, and joy of joys, the intolerant dictatorship is now a Right-Wing intolerant dictatorship with Putin who is just their sort of guy.
    Oh gladsome day! Here is a fellow the Democrats dislike and he dislikes them. He must be good. Right? Biden is standing solid with Zelenskyy. If that’s the case then Putin has to be right? Damn straight!
    Of course, they don’t put it, quite that way, they try and ease about with some muted words and let the loudmouths on social media speak for them.

    Now to be historically brutal Ukraine and its peoples have a less than clean past, and so has Russia, so its no use playing an ethical card for the latter. There is blood on both sides (as with all conflicts). However Ukraine is an independent state. Russia only got mad because of the Orange Revolution and could have exercised some soft power and played the ‘Let’s be neighbours guys. You can’t trust those Westerners’ role. Instead buoyed up by its success in the Donbas and Crimea AND also keeping Assad on his throne in Syria. The Kremlin thought it could do it all again. No one seems to read the history of the folk they are about to invade, I mean the real deep social history…you would have thought after….oh never mind.

    So we have another European War (the Russians will hate it being called that, they don’t think of themselves as such, but Europe is involved). And we have an American Right which has flipped itself on its head and butt because its own opposition is supporting Ukraine….I daresay if Biden saw the Russian point of view…we’d have Republicans shouting for guns for Ukraine and boots on the ground.
    If it wasn’t a full on conventional war and just a political ‘handbags at ten paces’ it might be funny.

    Republicans: Thy name is hypocrisy.

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

    1. Thank you for this chock-filled comment, Roger. I do think it’s worth noting that though Ukraine has some ugly history and is still struggling with corruption and some internal bad actors, the development of Zelensky from an almost accidental president to a world leader who’s a force for democracy is an inspiring story—and the support he has from his people despite their suffering may bode well for the future.

      As for the Republican radical hypocrites, they must be destroyed at the ballot box—and there’s growing evidence we can do that.

      Liked by 5 people

      Reply

      1. Sorry I went all ‘Euro’ on you there Annie. Once I start on our continent’s history it’s hard to stop😌(there’s a lot of it!).
        I wish Ukraine well. If it should falter then the next tension points will be on NATO grounds. Where and how this will grind to a halt is hard to say. I guess one tipping point might be when it leaks out that President Putin is in hospital ‘undergoing health checks due to the pressure of work’ and isn’t seen for a while. Then will ‘retire’….and not be seen apart from a few shady photos…..

        On your home patch, yes they must be destroyed, humiliated and discredited at the ballot box. That was the USA veers away from going over ‘The cliff’.
        Since there is little sense of unity just lots of egos and hysterics amongst the current loudmouths it is hoped The Grownups will return to take control of the Party.

        Liked by 3 people

      2. No apologies, please, Roger. I welcome your going all “Euro.”

        As to Putin’s possible disappearance, from what I gather his replacement might even be more aggressive—not much chance of a dissenter moving in.

        Most Never Trumpers—Republicans and former Republicans—I hear speak believe the GOP has gone beyond redemption. Hard to know what can replace it.

        Liked by 2 people

      3. Thanks Annie…I’ll try and restrain myself though.

        I agree there could be worse than Putin, that said there is a lot of resentment in other circles simmering out of sight. It’s unlikely there will be a peace as we would recognise it, just an uneasiness.

        The fate of the Republican Party seems to bear parallels with Putin and The Kremlin Court’s ‘adventure’ into Ukraine. An extremist approach to a set of issues that would be better served by negotiation. Neither groups seem to consider the opposition as being anything than a dreamed for quiescent element to be brushed aside.
        Whereas the traditional Iron Hand always plays a factor is Russian politics since both major US parties are coalitions based on broad consensus.
        In its current form the Republican party extremists do hold an upper hand through mob fear-factor; if however they are roundly defeated in the next election disintegration is a possibility. It is a fate parties which loose focus face.
        I would like to imagine a rather solid moderately conservative grouping taking away a substantial number of republicans, and a gradual reformation taking place. It would be the best hope in the current situation.

        Liked by 2 people

  7. I see some jingoism in the comments (we have the guns, we have the men, we have the money too), reflections of the domino theory (nothing can be conceded without an overall collapse), and echoes of Donald Rumsfeld’s idea that a small problem might be solved by making it bigger. I think the Biden Administration is right to tread carefully, and I hope Anthony Blinken is actively working at diplomacy.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. Wiser, more experienced heads than yours or mine—who are close to the unfolding events—believe it is essential for Ukraine to push back the Russians. Do you know of any instance in which Putin entered a lasting peace agreement? Of course not because he’s made his goal of reconstructing the former Soviet Union well known.

      As for “jingoism,” aren’t you the one who said you eschew labeling others? I respect that earlier position.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

    3. Each “war” is different in the specifics, but still can be categorized. The specific conflict between Russia and Ukraine can be classified as an invasion.

      Ukraine and Russia both have internationally recognized boundaries. Any boundary dispute belongs in the International Court of Justice. Russia violated the Russia-Ukraine Friendship Treaty when they invaded eastern Ukraine and Crimea. Both those areas are part of Ukraine as recognized by international law.

      In this conflict Russia is the clear aggressor . Russia invaded Ukraine, not the other way around. Russia took Ukrainian territory and removed Ukrainians from their homes, including taking children. Russia has destroyed Ukrainian cities with high tech weapons and artillery. Ukraine has not attacked Russian cities even at this stage.

      Putin, with the blessings of the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, has claimed the “right” to take any territory that was ever a part of Russia.

      There is no justification for Putin’s attack. Ukraine is in the same position as Poland in 1939 and China in the 1930s.

      We are faced today with the choice. We accept that “might makes right” and dictators may successfully steal land and terrorize civilians. Close to genocide. Or we can do what we are doing, standing up to the terrorist state.

      This is not jingoism. It is calming looking at the situation and making a decision to support international law and the people of Ukraine. Not the domino theory, since it is unlikely that Putin would dare challenge any NATO nation (unless Trump somehow is able to grab power in 2024). It is not Rumsfeld and his desire for US world dominance in the “New American Century”. It is supporting international law.

      Yes, the US has the “guns”. One thing Americans are very good at is warfare and developing military hardware. Like it or not, that is who we are. The question is: Do we use our power to support international law or do we refuse to do so and instead move toward an isolationist policy?

      Liked by 4 people

      Reply

      3. I don’t accept the idea of a rigid dichotomy between supporting international law and isolationism. We are supporting Ukraine, but the war has already gone on too long at great cost to the people of Ukraine. Ukraine’s goal is said to be the status quo ante (presumably with secure borders, internal peace and civil administration in the entire country), but that may be unachievable in the foreseeable future. Resisting aggression doesn’t absolve Ukraine from formulating reasonable war plans and goals, which they may have done in secret.

        Support for Ukraine in Congress appears to be weakening and will likely continue to do so. Ukraine can’t carry on, with or without international support, indefinitely. Cluster bombs, modern tanks, and long range missiles mean more death and destruction on both sides. Protracted war is in no party’s interest. We ought to be looking for peace, not at any cost, but in any reasonable way. Korea may be a case where a ceasefire, which met the goals of neither side, benefited both.

        Liked by 1 person

  8. Ms Annie, the problem for the Ukrainians is that if they take that deal they and everyone knows that they will be killed anyway. For Ukrainians this is a existential fight, they know it as does any student of history. What many now miss is that Putin has also made it a fight for Russia’s existence. There will be no winner but there will be a loser. That is what makes world leaders uncomfortable.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. They know they’ll be killed, or enslaved, or—one of the chilling questions Zelensky posed was why the Russian soldiers seem so intent on castration.

      Applebaum mused about a possible change in direction by the Russians—not a change of leaders, but a pulling back bc of the mounting cost of the war there. Not likely, but possible.

      I find it especially disconcerting that calls to stop funding are coming as the Ukrainians are making slow progress. I continue to hear voices I respect saying they can prevail.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  9. It won’t matter. The Ukrainians will not be stopping. They have found a leader and Russia has found that they do not. We currently have a leader IMO who has some ideas as to how and when to get out of and into wars. No matter the shrillness of the surrender caucus’s cries, for the next 16 months the aid will flow if it has to.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. How might fighting end in 16 months or less?
      Offense is more costly than defense.
      Russian resistance will stiffen, if fighting nears the international border.
      Russian propaganda will continue to weaken support for Ukraine in the West.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      1. Russia is already losing. In that time period Joe will have secured his second term and Russia will be without hope. Meanwhile Ukrainians will continue to defend their homes. Theirs is the existential battle everyone else involved are mere dilettantes.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. I knew that dear! We are merely two of a army of believers. Americans are a people of messy habits but we believe that we can make it better.

        Like

  12. I just saw someone on Twitter saying that the Ukrainian War was a money laundering operation and to stop funding the fighting, it was actually a comment underneath the video I watched in your latest post. It’s so sad to see. I also had no idea about them capturing children and making them hate their own families! That is so inhumane! How dare they tear apart families like this!

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

Leave a comment