Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Russia Invades Ukraine
In a speech Wednesday night, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced a “special military operation,” followed immediately by troops entering Ukraine and large explosions throughout the country.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky confirmed the attack and declared martial law. Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba called it a “full-scale invasion,” adding, “Peaceful Ukrainian cities are under strikes. This is a war of aggression. Ukraine will defend itself and will win. The world can and must stop Putin. The time to act is now.”
Putin strenuously warned against international meddling. “To anyone who would consider interfering from the outside: if you do, you will face consequences greater than any you have faced in history,” he said. “All relevant decisions have been taken.”
President Biden issued a statement: “The prayers of the entire world are with the people of Ukraine tonight as they suffer an unprovoked and unjustified attack by Russian military forces.” He added that he will consult with the leaders of the G7 on Thursday and promised “severe sanctions.”
Published in General
I don’t think WWI gives that impression.
I see the “two” WW’s as one, with two phases, decisions made after the first, leading to the second. References here and elsewhere, to Chamberlain an Munich, are not hyperbole.
BTW I made a small edit in my original post while you were typing. Maybe check it out.
I’m not “attacking” anybody – I’m asking a sincere question and getting dodges.
It’s been posited that in the event of witnessing an assault, the choices are do nothing, intervene directly, or “call the cops”. I want to know who “the cops” are in this particular situation. The US? The UN? Canada? Zaire?
I’m not trying to trap anybody – I honestly don’t know who the person that said “call the cops” meant.
What agreement are you talking about?
In this example, America *is* the cops. We know who the bad guy is, we are armed, Ukraine is at risk of grievous death, we possess the skill to intervene more so than anyone on the planet, and the crowd will not intervene. And, we’ve already gotten the 911 call.
They are a nation of 40 million people who have been able to keep their national identity despite 400 years of Tsarist oppression, followed by 75 years of Soviet oppression including a famine that caused millions of deaths. They have their own identity, language, culture, and just want to be left in peace.
They fought Russian proxies. Putins “little Green Men” in Crimea and Donbas.
The Ukrainians have been doing their own fighting and dying.
Maybe you should brush up on a topic before commenting, eh?
Interesting
When Candace Owens tweets this, is she advocating for US troops to fight Russian proxies in Canada?
The person who said call the cops was pointing out how an individual witnessing a crime is NOT THE SAME as a country getting involved in global conflicts.
He’s saying the analogy doesn’t work. But the person who made the analogy wasn’t even responding. The “dodger” has no answer because it wasn’t HIS analogy.
No more countries admitted to NATO. Wasn’t that a really old agreement with Russia?
After further research, I see that’s a highly contested statement by both sides as to whether an agreement existed.
Due to a lack of trust in my own government and western nations, I’ll settle with “I don’t know what the truth is.”
If I may be so bold as to comment on my own post, I fear some may misinterpret what I said about it not being “our” problem. We are the most significant kingpin in the free world, at least we were. We are hardly absolved of any responsibility or involvement if it isn’t just “us” who have the problem. Far from it. What’s happening right now is a HUGE problem to us. And with the ineffectual leadership – if you can call it that – that we have going on right now, it’s bound to get a LOT bigger. No, I don’t want to get into a shooting war with Russia. But if some things don’t change, that’s the direction we’re heading. NT’ers insist that Trump was going to get us into a war. No, but this president is driving us in that direction.
I view much of this, “it’s not our problem,” “who cares what happens to Ukraine,” sentiment as America’s New Isolationism. People who know something of the history of the events between the wars I mentioned above, know full well how that era’s American isolationism contributed to WW II, and very nearly led to the destruction of the UK.
And IF we have rebuilt our war stocks, and IF Ukraine is in a situation to use them effectively, airlift large supplies of anti-armor and anti-aircraft weapons. Russia is not in a position to replace destroyed front line armor and aircraft, at least if we choke off their energy income. This has the strategic goal of reducing or eliminating the Russian threat to Poland and the Baltics. It has the side effect of making Russia even more vulnerable to China, for better or worse.
I’m not seeing “The analogy doesn’t work” in this response [below]. I’m seeing “these are the conditions where you intervene directly, otherwise call the cops”. So I’ll ask again, who are “the cops”?
The truth is never what the Russian government claims it to be. I remember reading, in this book, that during the Second Chechen War Russia claimed that the Chechen leaders were radical Islamists in league with Al-Qaeda. That was a lie, but the Bush administration was very stupid and believed anything that anyone said anywhere if it made Islam seem scarier.
Remember Condoleeza Rice stating that when Putin called after 9/11, she knew that the Cold War was really over?
She continues to be a moron, but that’s beside the point.
Here’s some things I know:
The US has a history of getting involved in covert manipulations in the politics of foreign countries. We have historically relied on our superior military might to protect us from any fall out.
With the advent of Obama, our military strength was severely diminished, but our covert behaviors were not stymied. Then we “elected” the corrupted Biden and our military was even further weakened while even more dumb foreign policy was put in place.
These stupid actions have consequences. Putin is a predictable menace. Our own inept foreign policy brought us to this mess.
There was very definitely an agreement by “the west” to guarantee Ukraine’s borders in exchange for them giving up their soviet-era nukes.
How’s that working out for them?
Then you answer – who do YOU think are the cops?
If your answer is the United States, then my response to you is how did we become the global authority and WHO invested us with it and how does our ASSUMPTION of it NOT lead to global hostility?
Milquetoast. But not surprising.
It seems to rarely be what we claim it is, as well.
Not well, which is one reason I’ve always found that policy kind of repugnant.
And why I question just how sovereign Ukraine considered themselves.
Not exactly Churchillian, is it?
She’s not wrong:
Whatever you think our obligations to defend Ukraine at the moment, you must concede that the green movement in Western Europe and the United States made his actions possible.
Given the state of our country right now — specifically its leadership or lack thereof — isolationism might be the best path forward.
Kozak,
What should we do? Cut Russia off from the banking system? Ramp up our own oil and gas for the world market? Supply non-lethal supplies like food and medicine to Ukraine? Supply lethal arms to Ukraine? I am asking, not advocating, as you are much closer to being an authority than me.
Gary
After the Soviet Union dissolved, Ukraine was suddenly the third largest nuclear nation. There was a four way agreement with the U.S., U.K., Russia and Ukraine that Ukraine’s nukes would be transferred to Russia, and guaranteeing Ukraine’s sovereignty. What are our obligations under that agreement?
Yes. A return to Trump-era energy policies, under which we were the world’s chief exporter of oil and gas and Putin was losing.
Biden’s policies enriched Putin by making Russia an energy powerhouse.
Neither was Poland in 1939.
or France in 1940
Until it was our problem.
What a ridiculous line of disagreement. A hostile non sequitur. Nice.
Is it the expression of the opinion that you find unacceptable? The possessing of the opinion? Should Mental just shut up in your world? Will there be no comments except from those who issue orders?
Did Mental just claim to have issued orders that we will not strike Russia?
I cannot see a logical interpretation of your response in the context of what Mental said. It just sounds like tiresome hostile garbage. Note that Mental’s use of the One. Word. Sentence. Device. is addressed to the world at large, whereas yours is directed straight at him. Nobody here needs to be put in his place or pointedly insulted with tone like that.
Maybe this conversation gets better as it goes, but it’s off to a bad start by the second comment.
I don’t often get my “tone police” on, but for some reason, this sort of assault micturation just gets to me.
Whereas Biden is their rock and their strength? I agree with Seward.