Asks Gail Collins, in "The Conversation" at the NYT.
Her interlocutor, Bret Stephens, answers:
Our colleague David French offered what I think is the smartest answer to your question in a recent column. It comes down to this: general nuttiness connected to sundry Hillary Clinton and Hunter Biden conspiracy theories, plus a belief that Putin (a former K.G.B. agent) somehow represents manly Christian values in the face of effeminate wokeness, plus a kind of George Costanza 'do the opposite' mentality in which whatever Biden is for, they must be against."
पोस्ट्स
२३८ टिप्पण्या:
238 पैकी 1 – 200 नवीन› नवीनतम»When did liberals get so obsessed with fomenting war. Is it the profits?
You will need a bigger blog.
Because it is an unwinnable foreign war.
Let me flip the question. Why aren’t the Dems calling for a truce and peace negotiations? Peace! Haven’t enough people died already? BTW, what is the body count? A NE state Senator visited the front and he told me that the Russians leave their dead in the field and the stench is unbearable.
All that I’m saying, is give peace a chance.
That's the smartest answer? Who do they talk to to get these ideas?
This sounds like more mind-reading/projection. Whenever the media/Left tells me why the Right does something, their answer tells me more about them than it does about the Right.
Shitheads who can't find their asses with 6 hands.
It was the great David French who said… said nobody ever. Until now…
They wonder WHY we don't trust or believe them when the conspiracy theories about Hunter and Hillary turned out to be true. They should go over there themselves..with their families and fight if they are so eager to get us into another war with Biden. This WOULDN'T be happening if they didn't rig the election for the bumbler in chief.
Is David French still considered to be on the political right? I think the main reason people on the political right oppose the war in Ukraine is that there is little American interest to be served, regardless of who wins, and why risk WW III just to tweak Putin's nose?
3 people that should just acknowledge they don’t have a clue.
Here is a question for the left; why didn’t they care about Georgia? Crimea? Putin did those things too, and the left were not interested. Ukraine is just a tool to hide Biden’s travesty in Afghanistan, another place the left didn’t care what happened.
Bret Stephens quoting David French. It doesn't get any dumber. Stephens ought to talk to some Ukrainians and ask what they thought of their government before the Russians attacked.
I want to know what the children of Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, and Mitt Romney were doing over in Ukraine wetting their beaks. The Ukrainians will lose this war, just as the Finns did theirs with Russia, but will similarly exact a high price for the victory. Nothing new in that; Stalin wasted the lives of a third of a million of his soldiers taking Berlin street by street and house by house, when he could have starved the city into submission, all for a propaganda victory.
According to the recent democrat talking points: we can only have southern border security if republicans agree to open ended funding of Ukraine in their war with Russia.
Also, a reminder: resources are finite…
Not Ukraine, but Kiev, in Spring, in the overthrow of the elected government. When did the political left begin to empathize with a democratic/dictatorial duality in war and national insurrections? All's fair in lust and abortion?
When you read there were peace deals on the table, when the countries financing the war refuse to encourage additional peace negotiations, it shouldn't be a surprise that people are skeptical with their support. That and the fact the funds are not tracible and are likely being pocketed by government officials on both sides of the Atlantic.
It's not like people don't say why they are "hostile to Ukraine", which, to begin with, is a underhanded way to put it.
20 years ago they would've blamed it on Rush Limbaugh.
Why is the left so hostile to Russia? It's probably because they are still resentful over the loss of the Soviet Union. It had such great promise to guide humanity into a just and progressive future.
Premature withdrawal from Iraq with Iranian funding and a second war, catastrophic escape from Afghanistan with parting "gifts" to the terrorist regime, and the Obama/Biden/Clinton World War Spring (WWS) series. Why don't Black, Brown, Peach, Orange, Yellow, White Lives Matter? So politically congruent. Throw another baby... fetus on the barbie, it's over.
Maybe it was Ukrainian election interference on behalf of Hillary Clinton that started it all. You know, that pack of Ukrainian lies that the New York Times published in August of 2016 that took down Trump's campaign manager. Lies that were ignored at his trial, and they convicted him of stuff that Hunter is plainly guilty of based on public evidence.
Maybe it was the fact that Hunter Biden's laptop was not Russian disinformation, but was in fact, a massive trove of evidence, supported by other independent evidence on public record, that Proves that Joe Biden used his position to extract huge amounts of graft from Ukraine, and now we are supposed to believe that he is making disinterested decisions in the best interests of the people of the United States.
Maybe it's because they are using the same propaganda techniques against Putin that they used against Trump, for instance accusing him of being a "firehose of lies" but never fact checking him, because, you know, to look into the actual facts might raise some uncomfortable issues.
Maybe because the ICC indictment of Putin was conducted as the same kind of kangaroo court, where rules and precedent were just discarded, as the trials against Trump.
But the New York Times will always struggle with explaining this because they are not allowed to explain it. All they have is more propaganda tropes for the rubes who still believe it.
"we can only have southern border security if republicans agree to open ended funding of Ukraine in their war with Russia"
There's borders, then there's borders. This is the "rules based order" so the US border is just a line on a map, like Syria's border, or Lebanon's. But Ukraine's 1992 border is the sacrosanct word of God, handed down on Sinai. Them's the rules.
Another instance of illegitimate framing.
The question that needs to be asked and answered is what interest the US has in helping Ukraine continue their resistance.
We certainly have an interest since it's the best way to destroy Russia's armed forces so they aren't a threat to NATO. Allowing a Russian win in Ukraine could conceivably lead to threats to an actual NATO member (which is already happening), risking a much wider war with a greater chance of it going nuclear. The defensible borders of the Russian hordelands are located well beyond Ukrainian territory so this is only their first stop, and any Russian leader is going to push towards those defensible borders until Russian demographics and economics make it impossible.
The Ukrainians are stuck between a rock and hard place since we're legitimately going to refuse to commit NATO (aka US) forces directly for reasons that should be obvious, and territorial concessions are likely only to pause the conflict. While there are some areas that wouldn't refuse to be part of a greater Russian state, there are populations in Ukraine that don't want to be. The Russians want the whole thing.
The problem for the Democrats (and GOP neo-cons) is that clearly stating the real politik behind supporting Ukraine makes it pretty clear we're going to fight to the last Ukrainian and there won't be a peaceful settlement any time soon. This is not a position that has ever been popular with American voters who lean into a 'go big or stay home' foreign policy, especially since WWII. It's much easier to wave blue and yellow pom-poms and claim just assassinating Hitl ... err ... Putin will put an end to the war while complaining that the other side is "playing politics".
total suspension of All civil rights
total martial law
ALL males 16-70 are subject to the draft.. NO EXCEPTIONS (without bribe payments)
what's NOT to like?
Ukraine - a foreign policy based strictly on not going abroad "in search of monsters to destroy" seems to offer an alluring alternative.
Good advice from John Quincy Adams.
https://www.hudson.org/domestic-policy/what-john-quincy-adams-meant-when-he-said-america-goes-not-abroad-in-search-of-monsters-to-destroy
Both countries are kleptocracies. The Muscovites are horrible, but the Ukrainians eagerly assisted the Gestapo in rounding up and killing Jews from 1941-44. They were rebelling against their Soviet oppressors, you say? They could have done that without killing Jews. If there’s ever been a war that both sides should lose, this is it.
Senate Passes $95.3 Billion Ukraine, Israel Aid Package ~ WSJ
Apart from the security guarantees provided by the US to Ukraine in return for giving up its nuclear weapons: Not supporting Ukraine’s resistance against the Russian invasion will only cost the American (and European) taxpayer more. It will embolden Russia and China, and Venezuela, and Iran, and others, to flout the rules-based international order and carry out their own invasions without consequences. Which will require the US ultimately to spend blood and treasure to defend its interests.
The benefit of Ukraine support is actually that it can be done here and now on very favorable terms: no US soldiers on the ground, money spent on military gear produced in the US, tying down and degrading the Russian army. Which deters everyone else.
you know what the weird problem with the right is?
it's that for YEARS; the right Actually Thought, people like Bret and French represented Their interests
Well, I'm glad those two deep thinkers straightened it all out for us yokels.
Blinken said in December of 2022 that part of the reason that we withdrew from Afghanistan was to take the soldiers out of the reach of Putin, should we somehow get into, you know, a war that we might provoke with him at some future date. Since Putin could have armed up the Taliban pretty good and it would have been open season on American soldiers. After all, it's what we would do if we were him, and in fact what we did do when the Soviets were there.
There is now noise that we are talking about taking our soldiers out of Syria (Can anybody explain why we are there?) and Iraq, since the internationally recognized governments of both countries have demanded that we leave, demands we simply and Putinesquely, have ignored, to date.
If we do take them out, it will be because were are planning for war with Iran, and as we have seen, the Patriot system cannot protect our bases from Iranian missiles.
That's the "smartest" answer they all could come up with? Amazing. It is more evidence of how utterly out of touch these people are with most of the rest of the society they live in. Besides, they really wasted words. They could have just said "because they are deplorable" and saved their words.
Not to mention, that if the Republicans send billions to Ukraine, a big chunk of money will come right back to the US and into the hands of the Democrats.
Reading this stuff is like seeing the people admiring the emperor's new clothes cross examined, and watching them stick to their story.
"We certainly have an interest since it's the best way to destroy Russia's armed forces so they aren't a threat to NATO. "
This is how you get endless wars, you fight wars preemptively agains countries that have done you no harm, Russia has never attacked the US, because they *might* attack us one day. The only end to this strategy is world conquest. Is that what we are really about as Americans?
I have it on very good Democratic authority that calling Russia a threat is so 1980s.
I’m opposed to the war because I don’t wish to contemplate or know there are even more grieving mothers in Russia and Ukraine than there already are. And for what?
Hobbits just want to grill.
Why did the Obama and Biden Democrats precisely duplicate the "Neo-Con" foreign interventions they so severely criticized during the G.W. Bush administration? They flip-flopped between 2009 (Obama's arrival and the 'cleansing' of Bush's middle east policies) and 2019 to 2022. Corrupt Zelensky was installed by the 2018 actions of Obama's team. They echoed Bush/Cheney installing the ultra-corrupt Hamid Karzai in Afghanistan in 2001-2002.
I'm not left, I'm not right. Or I am left of a certain era and right of a different era? Hmmm? Expressing an ideology is confusing when one is dealing with the cookie-cutter corrupt power establishment. Maybe I just call out corruption when I see it?
A long and complex ad hominem. Assumes there can be no rational reasons for a policy difference. Divisive.
the New York Times would not be allowed to print the real reasons, because any attempts to rebut them would run into some uncomfortable truths that the New York Times is forbidden to acknowledge.
ALL males 16-70 are subject to the draft
Male-Males? Masculine males? That's so genderist... cisgenderist.
Liberals on the left, libertarians on the right, progressing in Spring without borders.
I am not "hostile to Ukraine", but I think some international conflicts might be resolved by adjusting some borders.
In particular, the Ukraine-Russia border might be adjusted by conducing referendums of local populations. If the mostly-Russian population of a Ukrainian region would vote by a super-majority (perhaps 3/4) to join Russia, then that border adjustment might be allowed.
Such border disputes should be settled peacefully, wherever practical.
In the current situation, the USA should continue to support Ukraine militarily, but should also encourage peaceful adjustments of the borders.
Stephens’ answer has some truth but the bigger truth is the nationalist, populist Right is sincere in its belief that America should be put first in priorities. Tucker Carlson has long posed the Ukraine situation like this: they (the warhawks) will give their all to protect Ukraine’s borders but not our own. I would add that the Ukraine-supporting crowd has never articulated an argument of any depth for why Ukraine matters to us.
David French gives the best explanation that completely ignores the explanation given by people on the right. Why is the left incapable of moving beyond explaining the right according to their own conception of the right? Would it kill them to make an effort to actually understand the right?
Well, yes. It would kill them. Or at least it would kill the liberal in them, and preserving their world view is more important than being a responsible participant in the public debate.
There’s no path to victory. We have to stop pretending that it can be won and move to a settlement.
Plus, we’re seriously out of money.
I propose including this discussion as part of the definition of 'straw man'.
and by this discussion, I am referring to the back and forth in the quote from the post.
Joe Biden used his position to extract huge amounts of graft from Ukraine, and now we are supposed to believe that he is making disinterested decisions in the best interests of the people of the United States.
Serious Question..
Is there a person on earth? That doesn't assume that the Ukrainians are blackmailing Biden?
Anyone? Any one think that the Ukrainians DON'T have dirt on him? and Aren't Using it?
gadfly? Rich? Dr We Evil? Anyone?
I think I would be offended at that response if it weren't so silly. Ann, can you make the steel-man argument against funding Ukraine?
We have Moe quoting Shepp now who is
Larry in this cluster of oxygen thieves?
Does anybody think Ukraine might be blackmailing Biden? It was a major source of income for the Biden crime family.
Yawn. Typical ploy of the left (and never-Trump right): Rather than confront a strong argument underlying a conservative policy view, throw out a straw man. We've seen it all before: Kill granny, white supremacy, greed, you name it.
Ukraine is a CIA puppet state. CIA generated coup in 2014.
My suspicion is that the U.S./Russia proxy war is actually about who controls gas and oil distribution in Western Europe and Poland. Thus, the sabotage of the Nordstream pipeline. It’s an economic war.
The war itself has been a bonanza of money laundering for the CIA and Biden family, and for all UniParty pols. Obviously much of that U.S. aid is being laundered back to UniParty bank accounts and campaign funds.
Trump started to pull back the curtain on all the scams, which lead to his first impeachment. The Russia collusion hoax was manufactured to hype this war. We’ve been pushed to the brink of nuclear war by Hillary’s lies.
A better headline would read "Why does a no-talent hack like Gail Collins have such a sweet gig at the New York Times."
But that would lead to questions that the regime prefer not be answered.
Oooh --that's the reason!
I thought I opposed it because we were further bankrupting ourselves to fight an unwinnable war in which we have no real interest on behalf of a corrupt regime, in the process alienating a country that should be, not exactly an ally, but certainly a partner in many ventures, in the process pointlessly slaughtering hundreds of thousands of people and laying waste to a whole region.
Turns out that's just "general nuttiness."
Inability to articulate your opponent's position is the first sign of your unseriousness.
As Kaus says, it would probably have made a difference if they had come up with somebody other than Alexander Vindman as a spokesperson. That weak asshole, with a stupid argument about impeachment? It confirmed for me how much Ukrainian money must have been sloshing around for years. Crowdstrike "investigating" DNC emails, etc. I objected to Bush Jr invading Iraq, being manipulated by Ahmed Chalabi, and I object to the U.S. being manipulated by these book-burning, memory-holing Ukrainian assholes.
It's surprising they weren't able to work abortion into their answer.
That's an own goal.
Wow. They do live in a fantasy world - at least from my perspective.
Funding the Ukraine war is not the sticking point. The populist right wants the border closed; the Uniparty doesn’t. That’s where the real fight is occurring. Not funding the Ukraine war is a direct result of not funding the border.
I cant speak for others.
FIRST history did not start this morning with the sun rising.
Biden/Obama did exactly zero when Putin invaded Crimea.
The Biden Obama administration that sent aid to Ukraine. So its been happening for a while. Did I mention they sent blankets and MRE's and medical supplies? No bullets.
That becomes your base line understanding. After years of negotiations Biden/Obama team agreed to a Small amount of DEFENSIVE weaponry.
Cutting the tail off the Dog, 1 inch at a time.
Back to a history lesson.
Korea
Viet Nam
Affganistan
The USA lost all of those wars.
Because Viet Nam was a far superior military juggernaut?
NO.
Because just like now. Worthless Politicians are the only people in the war room, and Politicians are making all the military decisions.
If we want Russia out of Ukraine, then the USA has the power to make it so.
But all I see is the military industrial complex making up the revenue they lost during 4 years of President Trump
Shorter version. Sell me on what you are going to accomplish, and tell me how I can determine if you are advancing toward that stated goal.
This is not a red/blue thing. That the left insists it is, only adds to my distrust.
"Her interlocutor, Bret Stephens, answers:
Our colleague David French offered what I think is the smartest answer to your question in a recent column."
The lack of self-awareness is astounding.
"...It comes down to this: general nuttiness connected to sundry Hillary Clinton and Hunter Biden conspiracy theories,"
Not theories. Facts.
"...plus a belief that Putin (a former K.G.B. agent) somehow represents manly Christian values in the face of effeminate wokeness,"
Manly? Questionable; more like braggadocio. Christian? No. And wokeness isn't so much effeminate as just plain nasty and censorious. It's Karenism.
"...plus a kind of George Costanza 'do the opposite' mentality in which whatever Biden is for, they must be against.""
Confession by projection. What a surprise.
I suspect a lot of people resent that the US is spending so much money on Ukraine's defense but not on things at home like border security. Though I don't know if that means people are hostile to Ukraine. I would happily agree to further Ukrainian aid along the lines of what Democrats want, if we got border security at home along the lines that Republicans want. By Republicans I mean the "MAGA-wing". Not Langford or which ever other reincarnated Mavericks support the Democrat-oriented "Bi-Partisan" bill.
On whole I'm largely ok with the amount of support we've given Ukraine. Russia unjustifiably invaded Ukraine. Sure I understand the realpolitik argument of Ukraine may have become an EU and NATO ally/member. But that doesn't justify the preemptive invasion of Ukraine. And while I'm ok with what support we have given I'm not certain that should last forever. I do not see a way Ukraine can achieve victory along the lines it wants, where it retakes its Eastern regions, let alone retaking Crimea. I also think Russia has suffered significant enough losses in people, materiel, economy, and international standing that most Russians regret the 2022 invasion. If this drags on for another 3-5 years, Ukraine will suffer even more losses of people which will take centuries for it's population to possibly start to recover from, Russia will lose more people, and we and the West will deplete more and more of our own assets that are better allocated to keeping marshalled to act as a deterrent to China invading Taiwan. Which because of it's semiconductor production is a more important strategic asset for us than Ukraine.
I would add only one comment to those of Jeff: many of the people who went all-in supporting Ukraine believed that they were backing the winning side, and that the war would end quickly, humiliating Russia.
Bret Stephens, a mushroom farmer of the NYT, thinks he can understand Republicans? Does he ever leave Manhattan, let alone NYC? Maybe he goes to the Hamptons for a weekend getaway?
The Ukraine is a war between two despots with the soldiers being the mutual victims. It's a money laundering operation to fund the Democrats and RINOs. It's an arms depot to arm terrorists around the world with U.S. weapons.
I'm all for SELLING weapons to Ukraine for cash on the barrelhead. Ukraine can fund their own government, no U.S. tax money allowed. Zelensky could sell war bonds to fund the war. I don't see any sacrifice by the Ukrainian people, just parties.
It's both the knee-jerk opposition to Emperor Poopypants, and a thinly-veiled anti-semitism that never really came out in the wash, whitewashed through self-righteous shock that corruption is being funded (as it inevitably has been since time measured in B.C. years).
Hamstringing Russian military adventurism and Putin's quest for a reformation of the Soviet Union (with all the totalitarianism, but minus the Marxist-Leninism) by wiping out 50% of Russia's military with the soon-to-be expired and obsolescent remnants of our arsenal, and a fraction of our annual defense budget, never crosses their tiny minds.
These are the spiritual heirs of the State Department nitwit who told Saddam Hussein in 1990 the US "had no interest" in Kuwait.
"It seems like the kind of freedom-fighting, Western-tilting country they’re supposed to adore."
=========
'seems like' is not the same as 'is'
Dunno 'bout the Political Right, but as a Libertarian the whole Ukraine thing seems to have started during the Obama years as a way to move public funds into Joe Biden's pocket.
As Government Graft schemes go, this one is particularly offensive because it involves:
..meddling in the internal affairs of foreign countries;
..a lot of killing, maiming, and property damage;
..quantum leap in bald faced lying in the coverup attempt.
"It seems like the kind of freedom-fighting, Western-tilting country they’re supposed to adore."
=========
'seems like' is not the same as 'is'
Where is Europe in all this? I do not see debates in their parliaments over shelling out billions from their own coffers.
Let's put Bribe me! Biden on the front lines as our secret weapon. The Russians would then be a walk over as they'd be laughing so much they couldn't stand up.
Win-win! We get rid of Bribe me! Biden and Zelensky wins the war! Who wouldn't love that outcome?
What they don't know about conservatives could fill three volumes.
It is an unaudited money laundering scheme just like unions & foreign aid.
Billions in
Millions back
The only fake conservative that knows less about Republicans than Bretbug is David French. And why do idiots like Collins get so worked up about files being locked in an unused guest bathroom than splayed in an unlocked garage?
Neither Bret Stephens, nor David French, nor Gail Collins ever fail to disappoint. As far as funding reluctance goes, how about these reasons: (1) Ukraine's failure to account for over $100 BN in aid already provided, as well as (2) a realistic plan for either winning or negotiating a compromise with those darn Russkis.
Such border disputes should be settled peacefully, wherever practical.
=================
can we also do this for States in middle of norhtern america?
Bret Stephens misses the point. the US and Russia are geo-strategic rivals not geo-strategic enemies. there is much we could do together. 2nd, Ukraine has dirty hands in eastern Ukraine. why ignore that? Stephens interpretation of the trump/repub position is ...what? sophomoric, puerile, uninformed. take your pick.
Everything Bret Stevens said is a left-wing fantasy about how we conservatives think. The simplest and most direct answer to our current stance against the funding is there has been no adequate oversite of the spending. Period. And this is true only because the Democrats and their Uniparty Rino pets have blocked all auditing and accounting for the vast sums of money and arms, and continually lied that "all the aid" is in the form of hardware, and then all the same uncooperative fervent funders of war have made physical trips to to Ukraine for no apparent reason. Did they return with suitcases full of cash? We'll probably never know. But that list alone, like the Epstein Island list, is a closely guarded secret of Uniparty DNC hawks.
When we further point out that it was Trump's opponent in 2016 who was personally responsible for selling America's uranium to Russia and that she was positively giddy about her goddamned "reset button" when she personally declared a new era of friendship with Putin, it falls on deaf ears. As does any recounting of the supine nature of the entire Obama administration when it came to the first two times Putin took territory from the Ukraine. Being a Leftist shill means never having to acknowledge the past because only the current narrative is important. But my personal favorite part of Bret Stevens fantastic concoction is that Trump was enthusiastically helping Ukraine arm up to PREVENT an invasion, and it was working, but as soon as Biden took office he reversed every policy in a snit-fit of "if he was fer it then I'm agin it" and Biden cancelled the arms transfers and Biden said out loud that a "little incursion is okay" which was just what Putin needed to get him to order the invasion.
So in addition to the simple "where's the money going?" position we hold, we absolutely 100% do NOT trust Dark Brandon to execute the "support" in the way the American people want it done. He has slow-walked every bit of aid, denied them aircraft, and extended the misery unnecessarily. How is the actual "war" actually going, anyway? Do they ever get around to assessing that while debating the far right myths? Too bad the elite coterie that delight in David French's fables can't be trusted to accurately assess the preamble, start and execution of this "war" but maybe they are just too dumb and too partisan to really care.
If so, that's just another reason to NOT support pouring billions into that black hole.
She adores American bodies and wealth strewn all over foreign lands. Me not so much.
David French has his head up his ass.
1) We are sick of footing the bill for an ever-expanding NATO.
2) Time to stop sacrificing Ukrainian lives to cover up for US gov't corruption.
3) The US had no business pushing the 2014 color revolution.
4) We have problems in American that need to be taken care of for $150 billion.
5) The US blew up Nord Stream 2 and lied about it.
6) We don't believe we are assigned to be the enemy of the Russian people forever.
Finally. We don't believe Biden, McConnell, Romney, the CIA, McCain, and especially Zelensky are the good guys.
Leave aside Stephens' nutty projecting substance. Two tells for sheer clueless out-of-touchness: citing David French as an authority on anything, describing an incoherent hodgepodge as the smartest answer.
Instead, Stephens could just visit the Althouse blog and get half a dozen actual answers that most people on the right would recognize. But of course that wouldn't go over well in the NYT bubble.
The question that needs to be asked and answered is what interest the US has in helping Ukraine continue their resistance.
100% correct and I would rank higher than my answer about funding oversite. Yes, what exactly is the "vital US interest" in this war?
Which David is a bigger fake... conservative... arrogant... lying... puke?
French or Brooks?
Tough call.
The political right isn't hostile to Ukraine. The political right is hostile to the elite idiots who continue to fund the Ukraine/Russian war.
The people who write this stuff are tone deaf. They have never taken the time out of their busy fart sniffing day to talk to people who actually live in America.
I'm indifferent to Ukraine. That doesn't make me a fan of the current Russian Czar. As Howard would have you believe. Who seems to have a difficult time understanding that the majority of us just don't care. Just stop sending our treasure to Ukraine. Let them figure it out themselves.
Anyway.
Ann, you are truly a genius at dumpster-diving through the NYT every day and finding the "deep thoughts" that create a feeding frenzy on this blog.
"Here is a question for the left; why didn’t they care about Georgia? Crimea? Putin did those things too, and the left were not interested."
I've wondered that since the beginning. People don't seem to remember that those other incursions by Russia, I believe the georgia invasion occurred under Obama, were all but ignored. It makes thinking people very suspicious about the motives for this current war.
She deserves a huge brawny fist driven right through her ugly fucking face for the “adore” alone.
Nothing says "Democracy" like banning opposition political parties.
David French is a Bill Kristol. LOL.
Our most certain rule now is that the Dems will support a war effort, then pull out the rug and cry "warmonger."
Why won't the democrat hacks in the media do a better job of showcasing the grifting going on within the ranks of the Ukrainian government? with our tax dollars.
Sigh. It's amazing how many preposterous things an otherwise intelligent commentariat can believe. Here's the deal, mark it down: if Republicans gain control of the government in the next election, they will soon see the wisdom of supporting Ukraine, DESPITE the use of Ukraine as a graft-generating machine for the Democrats. Recall - the Democrats were against the adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan in 2008. But then Barack Hussein Obama continued those wars throughout his presidency. Recall - the Republicans repeatedly sent bills end Obamacare to Obama, but discontinued that practice the moment someone occupied the Oval Office who would sign it. Sometimes a political football is just a football.
Where's the EU?
"Why is the political right so hostile to Ukraine?"
The default position is that we should involve ourselves in other people's wars? Shouldn't the default position be that we should not be involved in other people's wars and then ask the question if there's a good reason to move off of our default position?
And these mental midgets can't understand or willfully blind themselves to the possibility that people are against this war not because they are hostile to ukraine but because they care about the ukrainians who are being slaughtered, quite possibly to cover up corruption in our government.
The Ghost of Pauline Kael
The bill in the senate is about sending $billions on arms and ammunition to Ukraine.
Ukraine Population 2020 was 36 million 18 million male, 6 million fighting age male, 3 million fighting age males left after the the other 3 million left the country when fighting started
That leaves 3 million fighters. 500,000 are dead. Twice that many injured, unable/unwilling to return to battle. Ukraine is left with 1.5 million fighters.
As a reference the US lost 57k fighters is Viet Nam and it tore this nation apart.
Biden has failed to do the back of the envelope arithmetic to sell me on his fever dream.
here's a fun stat..
86% of Americans think that Biden, 81, is too old to be President.
To put that number in perspective, there are about as many Americans who think the earth is flat as there are who think Biden is up to the job
Five simple words encapsulate the entire thing:
Europe owns Ukraine; we don't."
Simple as that.
The left is blithe about the possibility of the death of the children of their domestic enemies. It’s not the children of lefties who fight and die in our wars. Fuck Collins and her ilk.
Stephen’s and French can fuck right off.
Both countries are kleptocracies.
Oh Lord, this.
I have to admit that I haven't followed the Ukraine-Russia conflict closely at all. But this post illustrates beautifully the simplistic, dualistic approach Democrats seem to like to take when they have a particular axe to grind.
The smartest answer to why the American right isn't supporting a West-leaning* regime like Ukraine's is that they love how manly Putin is? For God's sake. In my inattention, have I truly missed the American right's full-throated declarations of support for Putin? All this time I've been thinking the prevailing attitude on the right has been "a plague o' both your houses"!
*A notable tower in Italy has been leaning 4° toward the ground since the 14th century, with no intervention to stabilize it until 1993 and despite at least four major earthquakes in its 600-year history. Just how west-leaning is Ukraine's angle, and how long are we supposed to wait for it to get here?
Can we please send David French to fight on the front lines defending Ukraine?
Both Stephens and French like to stand close enough to the line so they can stretch a toe over, now and again, and call themselves 'a conservative'. But having both of them, there, allows everyone here to see the distinctions. An it looks like quite a few people are triangulating, and figuring it out. Ukraine has been a lost cause from Day 1, based on GDP alone. Russia may have a creaky manufacturing base, but it was creaky in mid-1941, too.
Victoria Nuland is Belarusian. The entire foreign policy debacle may be laid at her feet, and Hillary's, starting in 2014. The rest of the entitled grifters that have been riding the express bus since then, are just standard Washington DC Opportunists - and their family members, of course.
Blogger MartyH said...
Funding the Ukraine war is not the sticking point. The populist right wants the border closed; the Uniparty doesn’t. That’s where the real fight is occurring. Not funding the Ukraine war is a direct result of not funding the border.
We want the border closed AND no more funding for Ukraine.
Actually, it's because Ukraine is a corrupt country that doesn't deserve our treasure. Let them and the Russians bleed each other out.
"Why is the political right so hostile to Ukraine?"
"Our colleague David French offered what I think is a smart sounding answer that both remains within the confines of the narrative and expresses appropriate hostility and contempt for those who question that narrative."
Why doesn’t she ask someone on the right?
So it never crosses the mind of a liberal to ask a conservative about conservative attitudes, does it? That’s a sin you are sometimes guilty of too, Althouse.
So tell me, liberals who want to write a blank check to Zelenskyy, do you even have an idea of what a victory that is even remotely achievable might look like?
I didn’t think so.
The political class leveraged patriotism and the past successes of the US military to gain support for their various adventures over the past thirty years. But eventually you have to pay that debt back. They couldn't, so now there's nothing left.
Fuck them, fuck this country, and fuck the American people.
They didn’t invade Crimea, Crimea defected. Nobody there wants to go back to rule by the ultranationalists in Kiev who consider them traitors and subhuman.
I am against US involvement in the war in Ukraine for the same reasons that Barack Obama laid out: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-obama-doctrine-and-ukraine/ . And a war that Ukraine cannot win: https://unherd.com/2023/07/why-no-one-can-end-the-ukraine-war/ .
I blame the traitorous Vindman twins. They got Ukraine involved in the war between the Democrats and Republicans, a terrible mistake.
Lying Senator Pierre Delecto on X:
We are not being asked to send American troops into war, only to help the Ukrainians defend themselves. If we fail to help Ukraine, Putin will invade a NATO nation. Ukraine is not the end, it is a step—and letting Putin have his way with Europe would jeopardize our security.
“The benefit of Ukraine support is actually that it can be done here and now on very favorable terms: no US soldiers on the ground, money spent on military gear produced in the US, tying down and degrading the Russian army. Which deters everyone else.”
It’s not even deterring Russia.
- Rafe
When you read garbage like that "smart" answer, you can't help but wonder, are these people really that ignorant? Or are they being disingenuous to push their narrative? Either way, they are a joke to serious, thinking people.
Ukraine has long been known as one of the top 3 corrupt nations.
Blood brothers.
From my perspective my eyes have been opened with out 20 year smashing through the world after 9/11. We have killed and displaced millions, millions. And now after we rampaged through the Middle East, we used nato to instigate war with Russia. That is what I see. Not to mention 31 TRILLION or so in debt.
All I see are people getting rich on war.
While Joe was VP = Joe and Hunter profited mightily off pay to play Ukrainian business deals.
That is not a conspiracy theory.
F U - Democrat David French. Hack.
Whenever you claim that David French has the smartest answer, you have already lost.
Derbyshire characterized the conflict as between the two most corrupt white nations on earth.
I don't think the money pouring into Ukraine is in the form of money though, so that's a form of safeguard.
Hmmmmmmm........they don't seem very smart if they can't figure this out. Did it occur to them to actually ask people what they thought?
I blame the traitorous Vindman twins. They got Ukraine involved in the war between the Democrats and Republicans, a terrible mistake. The result is political crap all the way down. Just like the Democrats pushed the Charlottesville hoax, some Republicans push the CIA coup hoax. Such is the history of interesting times.
Obama said it best, “The US has no compelling national interest in Ukraine and the Russians see it as existential. Russia will always have escalatory dominance.”
Meanwhile, behind his back, the CIA and the man they parachuted in the Vice Presidency fomented a coup and installed an anti Russian government and kicked off the *civil war* that is still ongoing.
As I write this, Ukrainian women are protesting the rounding up of their husbands, sons, brothers, fathers, and male grandchildren to feed the abbatoir at the front lines. The Ukrainian government can't get the men to voluntarily sign up to defend the government against the Russians. That alone should tell you something about why people like me will oppose this funding bill. If this really were a just cause, it would not be necessary to enslave young Ukrainian men into fighting this war. Perhaps one should consider the possibility that the Ukrainian men refusing to fight this war understand this better than Mitch McConnell does.
These days, if a Leftie calls something a "conspiracy theory" you can count it as an admission of truth.
David French Drudge Bill Kristol.... follow the money.
It sounds like Bret Stephens, a secular Jew, feels that "manly Christianity" is plausibly represented by Vladimir Putin.
As a man, and as a Christian, I find this problematic. My takeaway is that Stephens is probably as opposed to Christian men as he is opposed to Putin.
Is that what he wants to say to me? Does this represent something that people I would "ally with" should believe? What is the sense of the commentariat? Is America's greatest threat posed by Christian men?
If French has the smartest answer there are NO dumb answers.
Hey, hyper-partisan person, what do you think?
Well, other hyper-partisan person, I agree.
What many above have pointed out, but also this --
I have no hostility toward Ukraine per se.
But the notion that Ukraine is some grand outpost of "democracy" engaged in a great, noble fight against tyranny, and if it loses we are all doomed? Yes indeed, I feel great hostility toward being asked to swallow *that* shit sandwich, especially by my inferiors like Collins, Stephens and French.
Thank you Gusty for this:
Lying Senator Pierre Delecto on X: We are not being asked to send American troops into war, only to help the Ukrainians defend themselves. If we fail to help Ukraine, Putin will invade a NATO nation. Ukraine is not the end, it is a step—and letting Putin have his way with Europe would jeopardize our security.
When the Uniparty eunuchs fall back on the crusty old "Domino Theory" to sell their new favorite war then you know we are being sold a pig in a poke. Eject eject eject!
Oso Negro
if Republicans gain control of the government in the next election, they will soon see the wisdom of supporting Ukraine
You have just explained why DC has mobilized the entirety of the DC administrate state against Trump.
And EXACTLY why his supporters never waiver. Because as President he will work with Ukraine to end this one way or another, but it will end . . . because the money will end.
What can not go on for ever, won't.
Trump will not bend to the GOPe, the way Haley would have ceded power to them.
If David French has the smartest take on anything, that is one dumb group of people.
Just the latest bit uncovered in January: NPR reports
Lotta injustice in the world. If you are going to intervene specifically how do you pick and chose? OTOH, if you were planning on just projecting an aura of power and influence, the current administration is pretty bad at it.
Perhaps this is entirely a cover up for various carpet baggers peddling influence, but I must admit I'd have expected the Russkies to leak information to this effect. It's weird that this has not happened. Heck, they don't mind making things up, not that it would likely be necessary in this case.
"some Republicans push the CIA coup hoax"
Which hoax is that, exactly?
Remember when we had to get rid of Trump for his unhinged tweets? When you look at the border crisis, the war in Ukraine that has destroyed the prestige of NATO, inflation, jobs numbers that are plain bullshit. And this is what Joe Biden tweets, I guess in an effort to be an internet troll:
https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1756888470599967000
Being against everything that Joe Biden is for would be a pretty good heuristic for coming to the right decision in just about any situation, unless you are talking about getting your tween daughter into the shower with you, or how to become a widower and then marry your kids' babysitter from before your wife was killed; in those cases, Joe is your go to guy.
More corruption and wasteful spending?
Ukraine authorities expose piles of cash in Supreme Court corruption probe
'Very much worried': Senior EU official fears Ukraine aid stolen by corrupt groups
In Ukraine, U.S. tax dollars are funding more than just military aid
Talk about "asymmetric insight". Collins and Stephens would epically fail an ideological Turing test.
It seems the official position of the NYT is, There is no such thing as legitimate opposition the Democratic Party.
There is only racism, general nuttiness, sundry conspiracy theories, irrational beliefs, phobia driven hatreds and childish obstinance.
I am also not hostile to a brand new Ferrari, I just don't want to pay for one and would rather go without.
The comments here are answering the question. Why is the MAGA right against funding Ukraine's defence against Russia? Because the hard right is unserious, has no defining principles, and is ignorant of geopolitical realities, the general geography of Europe, and history.
Collins and Stephens could have gone to John Mearsheimer or Jeffrey Sachs for smart answers on Ukraine, but they did not. They went to David French. That tells you all you need to know.
They wanted a politically correct answer, not a knowledgeable answer, not a wise answer, not an honest answer.
Typical NYT silliness. It's not about hostility to Ukraine, manliness or Christianity. Can you imagine NYT readers buying into this bullshit day after day?
It's about money!
Short version: Russia and Ukraine are cut from the same cloth. Both are corrupt. Both are run by dictators. Billions of taxpayer dollars are being pumped into Ukraine with no apparent strategic objective except to damage Russia or, perhaps, cover Biden's ass for the Burisma extortion. Neither is wholly legitimate or necessary.
Meanwhile, Biden also pumps money into jihadist entities after having given billions of American ordnance to the Taliban.
Every day this idiot, other Democrats and uniparty Republicans are in power our national security and financial well being are at greater risk.
If 'David French' and 'Smart' are in the same article, you are reading bullshit.
How about not sending my tax money to the most corrupt government in the region with whom we have no security treaty?
Send David Fucking French to fight, or one of Mitt Romney's 8,237 grandchildren.
The Ukraine has been a massive corrupt country since the days of Stalin... once given their freedom they became even more corrupt.
Yes, like Vietnam they can become a site of a proxy war to f*ck up Putin (just as we did in Afghanistan.. another corrupt to the bone country.) But how long are we gonna prop up corrupt regimes? 10-20-30 years?? So who gets their treasure drained the most.. Putin or USA??
Ukraine either kicks Putin out or makes a deal... and we need to force everyone to make a deal and stop killing. Biden is incapable of that.
'Male-Males? Masculine males? That's so genderist... cisgenderist.'
U.S. Wars will end when we pass a law that mandates only LGBTQ people and people with a bonus hole can be drafted.
Men can then relax and do stupid, mindless things in their place here on the home front.
It might also represent the idiotic optics of Ukraine’s leader, who canceled elections, holding a veritable reception line for congratulatory celebs, which, fair or not, conveyed to at least this observer that something was amiss…and that many of the billions now reside in Switzerland. The Hillary-Hunter association may be a conspiracy theory but at least with Hunter is likely also to be a conspiracy.
Why? because the Dems won't protect the US border but are all in for Ukraine and Israel.
Why is the US protecting their borders and national sovereignty and not ours? That said I hope the Ukraine savages the Russians and the Israelis pound Hamas into dust but until the border is closed they should only get our best wishes.
Nothing about lack of accountability, failure to formulate war aims, lessons of 20 years in Afghanistan and Iraq, general corruption in Ukraine, pressure or lack thereof for ceasefire and negotiations, etc.
Stephens is thicker than I thought he was.
"Why don't they love Ukraine?"
How childish. Is it ever possible for the NYT/MSM to honestly portray the views of anyone who opposes them? It seems not.
So Burt Stevens just makes up crap and attributes it to "smart" david french.
The real question is why does the Liberal/left Establishment HATE Russia so much, and think we need to spend $60 billion dollars every 6 months to keep a war going over a border dispute that has ZERO to do with the USA security?
Why is the liberal/left so amoral? Why do they have no qualms about sending billions in weapons to kill thousands of Ukrainians and Russians? Why does Russia controlling the Donbas upset them so much? And why dont they care about all the Ukrainaians being killed or having to flee the country? What is it about Putin, that makes them start lying and screeching about "Hitler" and "tyrant" as opposed to 20 other authoritarians leaders around the world?
https://twitter.com/MarcoPolo501c3/status/1757432778885345782
"Conspiracy theories..." LO Fucking L
Zelensky in his army green is all propaganda and nobody is falling for it.
It's like some central American general with medals all over his chest and a fancy hat.
Give us a break.
BTW, who is the "Political right"? There is no "Right" in the USA. You have 45 percent of the country that votes for Trump and included in that are people who support Mitch the bitch McConnell, Thune, Coryn and Nikki Haley. 93 percent of Republicans voted for trump in 2020.
Average people who follow the news (not Right) are against giving Ukraine $60 billion because they (1) dont want to support an endless war that's killing people (2) think we can use that money to make life better here, and (3) see no American interest in "Killing Ruskies" or retaking the Donbas.
Further, they don't have an irrational hatred of a foreign leader (unlike our political elite) who has never attacked the USA or done us harm. The fact that Putin has 12000 nuclear warheads makes them think we should be friends and not enemies.
"Blogger tim in vermont said...
Obama said it best, “The US has no compelling national interest in Ukraine and the Russians see it as existential. Russia will always have escalatory dominance.”
Meanwhile, behind his back, the CIA and the man they parachuted in the Vice Presidency fomented a coup and installed an anti Russian government and kicked off the *civil war* that is still ongoing.
2/13/24, 9:03 AM"
Very interesting. But I pretty seriously doubt that was behind his back.
Rich said...
The benefit of Ukraine support is actually that it can be done here and now on very favorable terms: no US soldiers on the ground, money spent on military gear produced in the US, tying down and degrading the Russian army. Which deters everyone else.
Hey Rich. How many dead Ukrainian men is this worth for you?
1) "no US soldiers on the ground" = Ukrainians die and I don't really give shit as long as it's not me. I really like the Ukrainians Flag in my social media profiles.
2) "money spent on military gear produced in the US" = I fully support forever wars to support the military industrial complex. Dick Cheney is my hero.
3) "tying down and degrading the Russian army" = Dead Ukrainians are cheap. Just like Longshanks said in "Braveheart". Send in the Irish. They cost nothing.
4) "which deters everyone else" = I'm kidding myself. When China wants Taiwan, they will take Taiwan.
War!
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing!
"It seems like the kind of freedom-fighting, Western-tilting country they’re supposed to adore."
"Western-tilting". These filthy vermin really hate Russia, now that it is a non-communist, white Christian nation. They liked it just fine, back when it was the Evil Empire.
Democrats are all for forcing a cease-fire on Israel, but with Ukraine we must make sure that they fight to the death?
OK here’s why. Ukraine had Gogol. Russia had Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky, Pushkin,, Turgenev, Pasternak,
Jupiter said...
These filthy vermin really hate Russia, now that it is a non-communist, white Christian nation. They liked it just fine, back when it was the Evil Empire.
Do tell! In what sense is Russia now a "Christian" nation? Be specific!
And no, atheist Communist KGB Col Putin is NOT in ANY meaningful sense of the phrase an "Orthodox Christian believer", and only a total chump / moron could fall for the scam that he is
If Zelensky had agreed to Trump’s request to announce that Ukraine was investigating Hunter Biden, today the MAGA right would be solidly behind supporting Ukraine. The only principle at stake for them is loyalty to Trump. That’s all that matters.
The fact of the matter is that we laid the groundwork for this war back in the Clinton administration when instead of sticking with our agreement not to expand NATO after the fall of the Soviet Union we started to add countries to NATO. Subsequent presidents continued to allow new countries to join NATO moving closer and closer to Russia. We also enabled or led the overthrow of the Ukraine president in 2014.
Russia is not Soviet Union but memories of the Cold war linger and when you see old opponents begin to organize you start to think about resisting them.
"Why is the political right so hostile to Ukraine?"
Maybe the question should be "Why is the political left/ warmongers so in love with a politically corrupt country?" We know why the warmongers are love with the war ... er ... Ukraine. Why is the political left in love with Ukraine? Because the Biden administration told them so.
Her interlocutor, Bret Stephens, answers:Our colleague David French offered what I think is the smartest answer to your question
Since David French is a loser and a moron, you've already failed there, Bret
It comes down to this: general nuttiness connected to sundry Hillary Clinton and Hunter Biden conspiracy theories
Only a total lunatic tries to pretend that pointing out that Hunter Biden was on the payroll of corrupt Ukrainians, and VP Biden used his power as Obama Admin "point man" on the Ukraine to pay off those corrupt weasels for the payoffs that Hunter sent to him
a belief that Putin (a former K.G.B. agent) somehow represents manly Christian values in the face of effeminate wokeness
Which is the only think he got right, since that really is insanely stupid. Putin believes in Putin, and that's it.
plus a kind of George Costanza 'do the opposite' mentality in which whatever Biden is for, they must be against."
More projection from the Left. Since what the Trump years and Biden years have been utterly full of is TDS lunatics (including Bret and David) defining the political positions as "I'm opposed to Trump, don't talk to me about what I said before Trump came along."
The real question is "why are the Democrats so supportive of Ukraine?"
I support it because I hate Russia, I hate expansionist corrupt kleptocracies like Russia, and I hate Communist thugs.
They hate Russia because Hillary lied and told them that Trump colluded with Putin to steal the 2016 election (despite Putin's strong support for Hilary). And The Biden Admin is supporting Ukraine because the Ukraine gov't is blackmailing him over those previous payoffs.
Since I want to see Ukraine win and keep their independence, I'm totally ok with the Democrat corruption finally helping America, not just the paid off politicians
Gee, who would be hostile to this?
"On Saturday, CDU “defence expert” Roderich Kiesewetter said that Europe cannot depend on Trump, who he called a “tool of Putin” and a “wannabe dictator.” European countries must therefore “take on more responsibility for Ukraine”:"
"The war must be taken to Russia. Russian military facilities and headquarters must be destroyed. We must do everything we can to enable Ukraine to destroy not only oil refineries in Russia, but also ministries, command posts and headquarters. It is time for the Russian people to realise that they have a dictator who is sacrificing the future of Russia, who is sacrificing the future of Russian youth, including ethnic minorities, that this is a country that is basically bringing war to the world instead of becoming a force for peace."
Charlie writes, "Hmmmmmmm........they don't seem very smart if they can't figure this out. Did it occur to them to actually ask people what they thought?"
Never do that! You might get the answer that detonates YOU!
Frankly, I'm not sure of most aspects of this war. Both sides seem to be truth-adverse, though Putin's lies and distortions are totally pathological because they are unnecessary. While it may be true that Putin longs for the old Russia... whether Tsarist or communist, a hegemonic power focused on the conquest and domination of its non-Russian neighbors, that and the acquisition of warm-water ports... It is not established as fact. One of the few actual facts is that on 23 December 2014, Ukraine repudiated its "non-block" status and sought active membership in NATO, just the thing to inflame Russian paranoia. Anyone who has studied the outbreak of the First World War would get a cold chill from that development. It is patently obvious Putin fears a NATO-aligned Ukraine, and that is the only reason this war exists.
Zelensky has offered a return to neutrality in return for peace, but Putin has not responded encouragingly. Ukraine has flipped 180 degrees several times since it declared independence, far too often to engender confidence in the perennially suspicious Russian psyche. Furthermore, Putin finds himself in the position of Emperor William II in 1916. When the German army invaded Belgium in August 1914, the Kaiser assured anyone who would listen that Germany had no intentions on Belgium. Give us a clear road to France, and all will be well, was the explanation. However, after years of stalemate and slaughter, William and his government could not settle for any peace that left Germany without territorial gains, hence the demand for the annexation of Belgium. Putin is in a similar pickle. Russia has paid a heavy price in lives, but an even greater price in military prestige. Putin wants Ukraine because he thinks he's already bought it.
Russia today isn't so very different from Russia under Peter the Great. The official use of the Romanov arms complete with imperial crowns by the Russian Federation ought to tell you something. But what exactly? Is Putin out to annex the Baltic states? Finland? Poland? Possibly. His distortion of historical facts regarding the Nazi invasion of Poland, ably assisted by Stalin, suggests that possibility. But the contrary case is also a possibility. Must we wage war over a possibility?
Gusty Winds said...
Rich said...
The benefit of Ukraine support is actually that it can be done here and now on very favorable terms: no US soldiers on the ground, money spent on military gear produced in the US, tying down and degrading the Russian army. Which deters everyone else.
Hey Rich. How many dead Ukrainian men is this worth for you?
1) "no US soldiers on the ground" = Ukrainians die and I don't really give shit as long as it's not me. I really like the Ukrainians Flag in my social media profiles.
Do tell us "Gusty Winds", about all your close personal friends in Ukraine who's lives you so care about! What's that? you dont' know anyone there, and dont' give a shit about anyone there?
Which is why you want them all turned into Putin's slaves?
I guess "live free or die", or or all the other bits of US revolutionary belief are totally gone for you. So, why do you pretend to call yourself an "American conservative"?
3) "tying down and degrading the Russian army" = Dead Ukrainians are cheap. Just like Longshanks said in "Braveheart". Send in the Irish. They cost nothing.
We're not "Sending in" The Ukrainians, we're supporting them in their desire to fight for freedom from Putin. What are you such a morally wretched scumbag that you want them to be Putin's slaves?
What sort of moron do you have to be, to be convinced that only Western leftists have agency, and that the Ukrainians who are fighting and dying to save their country are just automatons animated by Leftists?
4) "which deters everyone else" = I'm kidding myself. When China wants Taiwan, they will take Taiwan.
People of Taiwan just voted a big "FU" to China. Apparently you dont' just love Putin, you love all Communist dictators, since you are eager for Xi to get his new slaves, too
Frankly my dear it’s not the 5 hundred thousand dead thats the issue. It’s the 500 billion dollars unaudited that is the actual funding for Soro’s destroy America armies of owned District Attorneys and Secretaries of State and Antifa rioters facing NO Prosecution and No bail for release.
We are no longer the USA. We have become an occupied Provence of the world Government that fears only a Trump restoration.
For most of my life, the left has adored the authoritarianism of leftest governments like those is Russia. Funny how these morons never have time to explain that shift.
Maybe these great “explainers of the news” could one day take a look at the cause of this war. Was it a good idea for Joe to OK a “minor incursion” by Russia? Does the administration’s foreign policy weakness play a role in this debacle? Was it a good idea to relax the sanctions on Russian oil in order to protect Joe against even higher inflation at home? Weren’t those sanctions supposed to bring Russia to its knees? Funny how the supposed journalists at the NYT never have time to discuss issues that may be unfavorable to their Democrat heroes.
Gail Collins and Bret Stephens--two morons nattering away at each other. I wouldn't trust either one to organize a one car funeral in a small town.
But (A) we didn't have this sort of conflict when Trump was in charge--Putin stayed in his lane; (B) there's at least a sneaking suspicion that Team Biden wa bought and bribed by the Ukraine long ago, so he is having the US pay back his debt; and (C) the war seems to be an ongoing sinkhole consuming munitions and lives and not accomplishing much; and (D) it's smart to reinforce success--and dumb to support failure.
Does all that help Gail and Bret understand? I doubt it. They are beyond understanding.
The Slavic Spring, if not supported by Obama, was likely a quid pro Joe in order to garner support other Spring theaters: Libya for Clinton, Ukraine for Biden, political congruence, Obamacares, immigration reform, etc.
So, the Clinton Plan, which used Ukrainian evidence against Trump's campaign manager and had a DNC operative named Chalupa visiting Ukraine looking for "dirt" as part of their overall plan to create a false narrative that Trump was a Russian agent and push this theory with faked up dossiers and evidence to law enforcement is a "nutty conspiracy theory."
If the Hillary didn't try this plan, things might be different.
If Obama and Biden didn't put this plan into intel briefings and push it in Jan. 2017, it might have gone away. If the House and Senate didn't decide they wanted to join in this conspiracy to "get Trump" it might have faded.
David French and pals didn't push back against this bullshit.
Reap what you sow, assholes.
A ceasefire ensures a sustainable conflict: Fatah, Hamas et al over nearly a century, the Iraq war through the Clinton administration, etc. Democrats love war, but they didn't always favor outsourcing through shared responsibility for sociopolitical distancing.
We unnecessarily interjected ourselves into 2 European wars that were no concern of ours.
We did this while Wilson and fdr were lying about staying out to win their reelections.
We should have learned our lesson in 1914 and 1939. Our ancestors left that corrupt continent for good reasons. We don't want our corrupt pols of both parties dragging us back in.
I'm rooting for injuries death and destruction on all sides.
Fuck Europe
John Henry
L
.
So, the Clinton Plan, which used Ukrainian evidence against Trump's campaign manager and had a DNC operative named Chalupa visiting Ukraine looking for "dirt" as part of their overall plan to create a false narrative that Trump was a Russian agent and push this theory with faked up dossiers and evidence to law enforcement is a "nutty conspiracy theory."
If the Hillary didn't try this plan, things might be different.
If Obama and Biden didn't put this plan into intel briefings and push it in Jan. 2017, it might have gone away. If the House and Senate didn't decide they wanted to join in this conspiracy to "get Trump" it might have faded.
David French and pals didn't push back against this bullshit.
Reap what you sow, assholes.
This is a terrible look for the NYTimes. They must be intelligent enough to understand the complexities here. We don't know if it's 1938 Austria or 1963 Vietnam. Will Putin go beyond part or all of Ukraine? Unknown. Is Ukraine a legitimate, democratically supported government or corrupt and lacking in much support? Unknown. Obama and the Brookings Institute recognized the fine line between aiding Ukraine and crossing a line with Russia, leading to a larger conflict. Obama chose caution and not giving lethal aid to Ukraine while Brookings thought a LITTLE more aid was acceptable. This should not be a Democrat-Republican thing. There should be questions by everyone.
And, yes, for Republicans there is the added question of whether Biden is corrupt and in collusion with a corrupt Ukraine. This question cannot be quickly dismissed. We don't really know beyond a reasonable doubt.
Chuck mentioned the Vindemin twins.
There is a 3rd older brother, leonid. He's a banker who has made a LOT of money in Russian and Ukraine finance.
Oddly, there is no mention of him on either of the Vindemin twins Wikipedia pages. I did not find him searching for "Vindemin brother"
I finally found this searching for "Vindemin brother banker" but it was on the 4th page of results.
Even searching leonid vimdman turns up a lot of hits on the twins and one on tungsten capital advisors where he is mentioned. But nothing on him in the first couple pages of results.
Is he being disappeared?
https://www.city-data.com/forum/politics-other-controversies/3104651-vindmans-older-brother-central-european-russian.html
Leonid Simon Vindman, Founder and Managing Partner, Tungsten Capital Advisors, has approximately thirty years of experience in the financial markets. During the past twenty five years, he has been focusing predominantly on Central Eastern Europe, Russia and Central Asia where he completed some of the biggest investment and advisory transactions in the region. He also completed transactions in the Middle East, and traveled extensively in Asia and Africa.
Prior to founding Tungsten he was a Managing Director responsible for investment banking origination and client coverage activities for Russia and CIS region at UniCredit Group – the largest international bank in Central and Eastern Europe at that time. Previously he worked as a Vice President Investment Banking at JPMorgan Chase, Principal Banker at the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (the EBRD), Senior Associate at Bankers Trust and Manager at Central Europe Trust.
He received his Bachelor’s degree from Dartmouth College and an MBA from the University of Chicago Booth Graduate School of Business.
Amazing isn't it? Israel fighting for existence against genocidal foes and and the Left is calling for a cease fire and mo' money to the terrorists! Two corrupt kleptomaniacs sacrificing thousands for no benefit, let's keep this going without end!
"Which is why you want them all turned into Putin's slaves?"
Oddly the ethnic Russians in Ukraine do not seem to mind going back to being part of Russia, like they had been for centuries prior to the fall of the USSR. Why is it so important to the US that Ukrainians should rule over Russians right up to the fake borders pasted together by a collection of totalitarian dictators, none of whom ever asked the people in the territories that they passed around like slices of cake. Crimeans seem quite content under Russian rule.
Why was this war worth it so that Ukrainians didn't have to live like Canadians, with a province that manages its own affairs in a different language? That deal was on the table, and the US killed it. Ukraine could be intact right this minute, and the war could be over. Not to mention that none of the nationalist ambitions of the Kiev, coup installed government on one side of a civil war is worth a 1% chance of a nuclear war.
"People of Taiwan just voted a big "FU" to China."
Let's see how that works out for them. The government of Taiwan claims to be the legitimate government of all of China. In other words, it's another civil war that is none of our business, and where we want to stick our nose. We can't fight a war on the other side of the Pacific in this day and age without a massive draft and converting our economy to full war mode, and even that won't be enough.
Imperial Japan snatched Taiwan from China as it built its war machine, it later used the island as a base to attack mainland China, and when WWII ended, and China wanted their province back, the US, the sole nuclear power at that time, sent our warships through the straits and warned China off recovering its province. Why would China resent that? It's a classic recipe for a future war.
What is amazing is the press repeating the trope that knowing history is irrelevant, and that these wars started yesterday.
I want Ukraine to win.
I am under no delusions that the Ukrainian government is incredibly corrupt, and a sizeable amount of the money being sent over there is going to be embezzled. I am under no delusions that part of the motivation to heavily fund the Ukranian war effort is to support the military complex and kickbacks (and bribes) paid to government officials. I am furious that Congress is fixated on a war in another country and utterly refuses to deal with an invasion of our southern border. I am even more furious that they tried to link the border and Ukraine together with what can only be described as a betrayal of the American people with the worst immigration bill in recent history. Finally, I am dubious that the Ukraine can accomplish more than it already has, though in war things can change in ways unexpected.
Of course, David French finds this position to be a sign of my moral failings, being the self-important, self-righteous, arrogant know nothing jackass that he is.
Coming in late with my same old song: there is no way Ukraine can "win' with the manpower deficit that they have, the failure of last summer's Ukrainian campaign should be proof enough of that; Ukraine and Russia are currently at a stalemate and it would be a great time to force the Ukraine to negotiate because the upcoming Russian spring offensive is going to land in Kiev and we and Europe will have pissed way hundreds of millions for absolutely no result; the one alternative that will be left will be sending in NATO (that means US troops)- love to see Biden running on that.
Unfortunately the opportunity to prevent the overthrow of Ukraine was lost when no one had enough sense to negotiate with the Russians when they were stymied two years ago.
I have been singing this song for two years without result. My greatest fear is we are going to be dumb enough to repeat our entanglement in Viet Nam.
I am hostile to sending billions of American tax payer dollars to Ukraine because it is OBVIOUSLY a grifter scheme that ends with a large percentage of that money in the hands of Democrats and their globalist cronies. Ukraine’s government is corrupt and has been in bed with corrupt Democrats and various other slime for a long time. Ukraine is just a money laundering operation for Leftists to steal from Americans. Putin is a vicious dictator who is trying to take what is not his. That doesn’t stop me from wanting the cash to stop flowing to Ukraine. I can understand both of these things at the same time.
I'm commenting before I read all the comments, so forgive me if I'm repeating an argument that's already been made. First, David French is an idiot. The idea that any significant part of the opposition, or even an insignificant part, views Putin as some kind of Christian strongman is an assertion without evidence. Most of the "conspiracy theories" connected to Hilary Clinton and Hunter Biden have already been proven true or are likely to be proven true in the near future. Reflexive opposition to Biden's policy isn't necessarily a bad thing given that, as Saint Obama has said, you should never underestimate Joe's ability to fuck things up. That said, it would really help gain support for more aid to Ukraine if the supporters would give us a good reason as to why this is in any way in the national interests of the U.S. Giving billions in aid in munitions to the Ukrainians will not help us when we're in a shooting war with the Chinese or Iranians (both of which appear to be possible).
"Here is a question for the left; why didn’t they care about Georgia? Crimea? Putin did those things too, and the left were not interested."
$$$$$$$$$
The billions that have vanished into Ukraine with no accounting is one reason I oppose the Ukraine/Democrat/Uniparty position. We know that Biden was on the payroll and Hunter was selling access to his father. The whole situation smells to high Heaven.
The comments here are answering the question.
You know if you'd just stopped there Joe I'd have a lot of respect for your opinion.
Why is the MAGA right against funding Ukraine's defence against Russia? Because the hard right is unserious, has no defining principles, and is ignorant of geopolitical realities, the general geography of Europe, and history.
But you didn't. You ignore the huge volume of actually thoughtful responses, with which you could have educated yourself as to what "the right" really does believe. But instead you default to braindead liberal drivel like Rich. Which tells me you don't think our (many here have already said this) position of define the USA interest in this war as a "defining principle." We do. Likewise accountability. And truthfulness.
Side note here that you might want to revisit Ukraine's stated objective before referring to it (with a British accent) as a "defense" against Russian aggression. Tyrant Zeleskyyy has moved beyond simple defense if you take his position seriously.
Maybe your root problem is the current president has not prosecuted the war in a "serious" way, with articulated geopolitical "realities" or ever once defined a "principle" at stake in this war. It really isn't on us at this point. Shouldn't Joe be telling you what's up? Why are you relying on "the right" to define the objective in our support for a war between two Euro states?
I will also add that Stalin must be pleased that the nonsensical borders the Soviet Union gave to the SSRs have had the desired effect. Ukraine's borders are not based on any particular logic - ethnic groups, historical borders, etc. - but intentionally designed to split up the population to make it difficult to revolt. Ethnic groups were split into two or more SSRs to dilute their power, not to mention to add more Russians to the population that would presumably remain loyal even if others did not. The goal was to sow division such that an SSR trying to secede would receiving major pushback from its own population, and, if that failed, provide a perfectly good excuse to rescue some ethnic group or another from those dastardly X that revolted and insisted on taking non-X with them.
Putin used the same trick to justify his invasion of Georgia, and the Armenia-Azerbaijan wars have their imposed borders as one of their key components.
tim in vermont said: " the Patriot system cannot protect our bases from Iranian missiles."
Particularly if they've been packed up and shipped to Ukraine . . . .
Ideological interfaith dialogue at the NYT. Leftist: Why do all rightwingers believe X? Fauxrightist: I don't question your premise, and the best explanation is that all rightwingers believe X because they are malicious poorly informed easily manipulated racists.
Hey Rich. If you're not going to go to Ukraine and fight as a paid mercenary, the least you could do is fly over there and help dig some graves.
I don't have to know Ukrainians personally to want them to stop dying to cover for US corruption and unnecessary NATO expansion. YES...UNNECESSARY NATO EXPANSION. Seems lately they're not in the mood to fight and die for it either.
I don't have to know children in Gaza to want them to stop dying either. And I don't have to know Israeli women not want them to be invaded and raped again.
I don't have to know middle east Muslims to want the US to stop bombing them indiscriminately.
I don't have to be African-American to wish liberals would do something about the drugs and violence their communities suffers in America's cities...run by liberals. Shit, our gov't put more effort into restricting HCQ and Ivermectin than they do Fentanyl. Maybe the $60 billion could help there.
Looking back on Iraq, Afghanistan, Viet Nam...wasted lives. Who gained what?
Sorry Rich. I'm sick and tired of the American war machine.
You don't realize it of course, but the Putin boogeyman has more of a hold on your mind than you can possibly understand.
Our political class bumbled us into this war. You can perceive Putin as an expansionist or paranoid and needing a buffer state between Russia and Europe. He could even be both. In any event, Putin had to respond when NATO insisted it was going to make Ukraine a member. Our leadership did not prepare for a military response. Biden’s “minor incursion” remark proves that.
Has anyone presented a viable explanation of how this war ends? Best case is a negotiated settlement with Putin as the winner. No NATO; Putin keeps most territory he holds now. Worst case is we bleed Ukraine to death, removing Europe’s buffer with Russia.
I'm pretty sure there is a 1 to 1 correlation between liberals who believe they are supporting and "defending democracy" here in America, and also believe they are supporting and "defending democracy" in Ukraine.
Both 100% delusional.
Since gilbar (7:13am) still can't bring himself to refer to me by name, and is so fond of all-caps, I think I should reveal what I think of his chosen pseudonym.
The fact is that when I see 'gilbar' I can't help thinking it's related to 'GLBTQ' and is properly spelled 'GILBAR' or even 'G.I.L.B.A.R.'. The initials obviously refer to the next frontier in human sexuality. Now that we've all accepted gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and even (most of us) transsexuals as perfectly normal and indeed admirable, what will we be expected to approve of next? GILBAR!
G for granny porn
I for incest
L for lavatory games
B for bestiality
A for anthropophagy (cannibalism)
R for rape
GILBAR! Coming soon to your nearest university or Human Resources department. You will approve of all of these or be expelled or fired.
I used to like Bret Stephens but he's completely lost it.
Douglas B. Levene: "If Zelensky had agreed to Trump’s request to announce that Ukraine was investigating Hunter Biden, today the MAGA right would be solidly behind supporting Ukraine."
This is a good example of how someone who has bought into one dem hoax after another has to continually create new and ever more outlandish hypotheticals to maintain the illusion of superior intellect and virtue.
Expect this phenomenon to increase geometrically as we move further into 2024.
Greg: "Which is why you want them all turned into Putin's slaves?"
How is it possible for a nation with a GDP 3/4's that of Italy turn "them all" into "Putin's slaves"?
One thing we do know: the estimated 650,000 Ukrainians of military age that have fled Ukraine since early 2022 will never become slaves...or cannon fodder.
Leaving only those Ukrainians without the means to leave to pick up the combat slack.
Hence: the average age of Ukrainian "combat" forces is now 43 years of age.
Not exactly a recipe for battlefield success in this artillary driven slugfest.
There is no benefit to the United States, Rich. We gain niether treasure or prestige. Neither party poses a threat to us or our interests. If Trump were still in office we wouldn't be having this conversation. Biden gave Putin permission to invade Ukraine en mass. Biden is Putins stooge. Not conservatives.
Wow, just wow. The democrats like rich have redirected the domino theory! Let’s keep pouring our tax money and Ukrainian blood into a meat grinder to kill enough Russians that they won’t be able to fight anyone else . That will make world peace!
Hillaries demonization of Russia to punish trump is the most evil act of the 21st century.
As Ukrainian draft protests become more and more widespread, maybe sending weapons so that the small number of Ukrainians who want to keep this war going can get their way is not the moral thing for us to do.
The Ukrainian people are sick of the fight, the government is afraid to pass a new draft law, because the anger might threaten their rule, and they won't draft men under 27 because the nation faces demographic collapse.
The ethnic Russians in Donbas and Luhansk have been fighting the regime in Kiev for almost a decade now.
The people of Crimea are quite content to live as Russians.
Maybe this war is not the holy cause that we have been told it was. Maybe the Ukrainians should take some time out and take a deep look at their national heroes who are mostly Holocaust collaborators. One can only wonder why that is? What are their plans for the Russian "subhumans" and "traitors" living in the territories being fought over?
"'Why is the political right so hostile to Ukraine?'
"It seems like the kind of freedom-fighting, Western-tilting country they’re supposed to adore."
It is, of course. If our supplies of money and other aid to Ukraine were being provided by a Republican POTUS, and especially by Trump, the right would be frothing at the mouth in support of the "righteous war for Ukraine's liberty!", calling any naysayers as cowards, unAmerican, Commie- and Putin-lovers, etc., etc.
'Which is why you want them all turned into Putin's slaves?'
I didn't know Putin was a democrat.
The things you learn...
I see that Rich at 0635h gave the standard neocon response to US involvement in Ukraine. I'm starting to think that Rich is one of the Vindman brothers dropping-in to educate the hoi polloi about geopolitical "truths". But which brother? I get a tingle just trying to guess.
I THINK I speak for all rational people in supporting Ukraine against Russia.
1) Our real opponents are China and Iran. If China and Iran see that there are no consequences to their expansive territorial advances they will attack and expand. However expensive Ukraine is now, the cost will be orders of magnitude greater if we do not suppress and intimidate China and Iran.
2) The problem is the cat is out of the bag. Obama undermined Iraq and Afghanistan and Biden surrendered to the Taliban in Afghanistan despite Afghanistan having been pacified and few to no American deaths in quite a long time there.
3) The Democrats and the media undermine American determination and morale and now the US Military leadership undermine morale and the ability of our military to perform operations successfully.
4) Given 2) and 3), America no longer has the deterrence it once had. Sun Tzu says the battle is best won without a fight. That is to say deterrence or the real threat of real violence and suffering costs a lot less than fighting. The Democrats and media harmed that greatly.
5) Therefore we need to support Ukraine.
However...
a) We need to support Ukraine to minimize our costs in blood and treasure but only to the extent that, with our resources not unlimited, we are not avoiding better uses of that blood and treasure. Our military is running out of materiel. So we really need to consider ... is Ukraine or Taiwan more important? Israel? By a MILLION times Taiwan and Israel are more important. Our interests depend much more on a free Taiwan and a strong Israel than it does Ukraine, particularly when free Europe already shirks their own security. If we are running out of resources, we need to make sure we can supply Taiwan and Israel, and supply Ukraine only if we can do the former. If not, Ukraine is the least important, particularly as Europe can take up that slack.
b) Surely every American supports sending weaponry to Ukraine. But our taxes should not go to the President's wife shopping at Chanel or paying their payroll. We supply weapons, not paychecks. As surely as everyone should support sending weapons to Ukraine, everyone should be concerned about graft, bribery, and corruption. If a million here or there disappears of all the billions, that is hard to track. If a significant amount of money is going to buy chateaux, ... well screw that. Learn Russian. We are out of here. You screwed the pooch not me.
In summary, we need to support freedom with weapons but not our soldiers. If the recipients of our beneficence are scamming our money then let them fight without any of our help.
'It is, of course. If our supplies of money and other aid to Ukraine were being provided by a Republican POTUS, and especially by Trump, the right would be frothing at the mouth in support of the "righteous war for Ukraine's liberty!", calling any naysayers as cowards, unAmerican, Commie- and Putin-lovers, etc., etc.'
Bullshit. Because Trump wasn't a warmonger president.
Quit making shit up.
Go to Ukraine to fight. Too old? Send your kids to fight. Send your cat to fight. Send Romney's relatives to fight.
Write a huge check from your personal funds and mail it to the Ukraine embassy closest to where you live. I'll be they cash it.
Haven't done that yet?
Coward.
To start: Both countries are corrupt. In 2020 Ukraine was ranked 117th in Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index. Russia was 129. Given their corruption, let's not pretend Hunter's role at Burisma wasn't pure influence peddling. Furthermore, we've been meddling in their internal politics for a couple decades now in a way we would never accept if Russia were meddling in Mexico. For what purpose? It's sleazy. We also don't like being lied to about what a bastion of democracy Ukraine is. It's not, and the fact that our elites are pissing on my leg and telling me it's raining makes me extremely suspicious.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा