Memo to Zelenskyy: Study Korea

 

Dear Volodymyr,

Does any of this sound familiar? The bad guys, North Korea, invaded the good guys, South Korea. To stop the bad guys from winning, the Americans intervened. Unfortunately, just as the Americans were about to eliminate the retreating North Korean army, the adjoining super bad guys, China, intervened and pushed the Americans back. The Americans had all the military advantages except one — China had an unlimited number of soldiers. The result: a bloody stalemate.

North Korea wanted to fight to the death. South Korea wanted to fight to the death. China was willing to fight forever as long as China itself was unthreatened. America, however, wanted the killing to stop.

So, America told the South Koreans it had to agree to a ceasefire or America would leave. America told the Chinese that they had to agree to a ceasefire or else things would escalate and put China itself at risk. (The North Koreans had no choice but to do whatever China said to do.)

There was no permanent and lasting peace agreement. The bad guys were not punished. Justice was not done. Not only was a country divided, families were divided. South Koreans were made to watch as their Northern relatives were subjected to horrific oppression.

But, the killing stopped. America stayed behind to hold the line. America also assisted in the reconstruction of a devastated South.

Seventy years later, still no peace agreement. The North continues to threaten and oppress. America continues to hold the line. South Korea has become fabulously wealthy and successful, while the North has become one of the poorest places on Earth.

To quote The Rolling Stones, you can’t always get what you want, but you just might get what you need.

Best wishes,

G-Pub

Published in Foreign Policy
This post was promoted to the Main Feed at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 81 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Subcomandante America Member
    Subcomandante America
    @TheReticulator

    Nah, Russia is running low on soldiers that Putin dares to use.  North Koreans rather than Russians were used for its most recent success.   Trump should send American soldiers and weapons to Russia to help the Norks kill more Ukrainians.  That’s how you make peace.   When all the Ukrainians are dead, then there is peace.   Give peace a chance!   

    • #1
  2. Subcomandante America Member
    Subcomandante America
    @TheReticulator

    Subcomandante America (View Comment):

    Nah, Russia is running low on soldiers that Putin dares to use. North Koreans rather than Russians were used for its most recent success. Trump should send American soldiers and weapons to Russia to help the Norks kill more Ukrainians. That’s how you make peace. When all the Ukrainians are dead, then there is peace. Give peace a chance!

    And besides, the Korea solution would mean NATO/US boots on the ground in Ukraine.  Putin would not want that.  It might make him unhappy, and nobody wants Putin to be unhappy.   

    • #2
  3. David Foster Member
    David Foster
    @DavidFoster

    Imagine that South Korea had had very valuable mineral deposits…and Eisenhower had decided *not* to leave US forces in S Korea after the ceasefire, but to strike a deal for mining concessions, resulting in a few hundred or maybe a few thousand American civilians resident there.

    Would North Korea have attacked again, or would they have been deterred by the likelihood of killing Americans and triggering a violent American response?

    • #3
  4. mildlyo Member
    mildlyo
    @mildlyo

    GrandpaPublius:

    America told the Chinese that they had to agree to a ceasefire or else things would escalate and put China itself at risk. (The North Koreans had no choice but to do what ever China said to do.)

    To say this explicitly, The US could threaten the existence of China because the Korean War ended (1953) a decade before China’s first atomic weapon test (1964).

    There is no equivalent power advantage of Zelenskyy’s patron (USA) over the Regional countering power (Russia). Not locally in Eastern Europe.

    I do like the analogy positing Ukraine as the original attacker. I have believed that since 2022.

    • #4
  5. Doug Watt Member
    Doug Watt
    @DougWatt

    mildlyo (View Comment):

    GrandpaPublius:

    America told the Chinese that they had to agree to a ceasefire or else things would escalate and put China itself at risk. (The North Koreans had no choice but to do what ever China said to do.)

    To say this explicitly, The US could threaten the existence of China because the Korean War ended (1953) a decade before China’s first atomic weapon test (1964).

    There is no equivalent power advantage of Zelenskyy’s patron (USA) over the Regional countering power (Russia). Not locally in Eastern Europe.

    I do like the analogy positing Ukraine as the original attacker. I have believed that since 2022.

    I must have missed the Ukrainian invasion of Russia in 2022. 

    • #5
  6. Barfly Member
    Barfly
    @Barfly

    David Foster (View Comment):

    Imagine that South Korea had had very valuable mineral deposits…and Eisenhower had decided *not* to leave US forces in S Korea after the ceasefire, but to strike a deal for mining concessions, resulting in a few hundred or maybe a few thousand American civilians resident there.

    Would North Korea have attacked again, or would they have been deterred by the likelihood of killing Americans and triggering a violent American response?

    Good argument, but I think you overstretch the analogy. NK had already demonstrated a will to fight the US. It’s hard to think that Russia would be willing to FA with US citizens in the way, especially under PDTv2. So I don’t think that’s a valid counter to the idea that an economic outpost is the best security for Uk, precisely because it’s an economic advance for the west.

    • #6
  7. mildlyo Member
    mildlyo
    @mildlyo

    Doug Watt (View Comment):

    mildlyo (View Comment):

    GrandpaPublius:

    America told the Chinese that they had to agree to a ceasefire or else things would escalate and put China itself at risk. (The North Koreans had no choice but to do what ever China said to do.)

    To say this explicitly, The US could threaten the existence of China because the Korean War ended (1953) a decade before China’s first atomic weapon test (1964).

    There is no equivalent power advantage of Zelenskyy’s patron (USA) over the Regional countering power (Russia). Not locally in Eastern Europe.

    I do like the analogy positing Ukraine as the original attacker. I have believed that since 2022.

    I must have missed the Ukrainian invasion of Russia in 2022.

    You did. Directly attacked Russia toward Crimea to take Sevastopol. Indirectly attacked Russia by attacking separatist oblasts. Then the Russians crossed the border in the north and the Ukrainians turned their army around to rush north and defend their capital. Not the popular theory, yet.

    So in the Korean war =to=> Ukraine War analogy given in OP:

    • North Korea => Kiev regime of Ukraine
    • South Korea => Eastern Separatists of Ukraine
    • China => USA
    • USA => Russian Federation
    • #7
  8. Doug Watt Member
    Doug Watt
    @DougWatt

    Russian forces invaded and annexed Crimea in February and March of 2014. Separatists were supported by Russian artillery, missile strikes, and tank movements from Russian forces border crossings, to include the downing of MH-17.  Unless you want to believe that coal miners were driving those tanks as well as conducting sophisticated missile and anti-aircraft strikes.

    One can disdain Zelensky but twisting the facts to absolve Russia from their responsibility in this war comes from Russian propaganda.

    As terrible as it sounds every dead Russian soldier is one who will not reach the border of Poland, Finland, Norway, and the Baltic States.

    • #8
  9. Subcomandante America Member
    Subcomandante America
    @TheReticulator

    mildlyo (View Comment):
    You did. Directly attacked Russia toward Crimea to take Sevastopol. Indirectly attacked Russia by attacking separatist oblasts. Then the Russians crossed the border in the north and the Ukrainians turned their army around to rush north and defend their capital. Not the popular theory, yet.

    First you have to work your theory ahead of the one that the war started when Ukraine dropped a nuke on Red Square and Russia had no choice but to retaliate.  When you make your theory more popular than that one, then yours can move up the ladder.   

    • #9
  10. mildlyo Member
    mildlyo
    @mildlyo

    Subcomandante America (View Comment):

    mildlyo (View Comment):
    You did. Directly attacked Russia toward Crimea to take Sevastopol. Indirectly attacked Russia by attacking separatist oblasts. Then the Russians crossed the border in the north and the Ukrainians turned their army around to rush north and defend their capital. Not the popular theory, yet.

    First you have to work your theory ahead of the one that the war started when Ukraine dropped a nuke on Red Square and Russia had no choice but to retaliate. When you make your theory more popular than that one, then yours can move up the ladder.

    so you’re saying there’s a chance!

    • #10
  11. mildlyo Member
    mildlyo
    @mildlyo

    Doug Watt (View Comment):

    Russian forces invaded and annexed Crimea in February and March of 2014.

    so who conquered crimea in 1995 then?

    Separatists were supported by Russian artillery, missile strikes, and tank movements from Russian forces border crossings, to include the downing of MH-17. Unless you want to believe that coal miners were driving those tanks as well as conducting sophisticated missile and anti-aircraft strikes

    half of the pre 2014 Ukraine military ended up on the separatist side of the civil war. many of them were probably coal miners.

    One can disdain Zelensky but twisting the facts to absolve Russia from their responsibility in this war comes from Russian propaganda.

    The Russians did what they did. Why they did it is where the disagreement comes in.

    • #11
  12. Subcomandante America Member
    Subcomandante America
    @TheReticulator

    mildlyo (View Comment):

    Subcomandante America (View Comment):

    mildlyo (View Comment):
    You did. Directly attacked Russia toward Crimea to take Sevastopol. Indirectly attacked Russia by attacking separatist oblasts. Then the Russians crossed the border in the north and the Ukrainians turned their army around to rush north and defend their capital. Not the popular theory, yet.

    First you have to work your theory ahead of the one that the war started when Ukraine dropped a nuke on Red Square and Russia had no choice but to retaliate. When you make your theory more popular than that one, then yours can move up the ladder.

    so you’re saying there’s a chance!

    Absolutely! If people can believe the CIA coup theory, there’s a chance for every other theory as well.   :-)

    • #12
  13. mildlyo Member
    mildlyo
    @mildlyo

    Subcomandante America (View Comment):

    mildlyo (View Comment):

    Subcomandante America (View Comment):

    mildlyo (View Comment):
    You did. Directly attacked Russia toward Crimea to take Sevastopol. Indirectly attacked Russia by attacking separatist oblasts. Then the Russians crossed the border in the north and the Ukrainians turned their army around to rush north and defend their capital. Not the popular theory, yet.

    First you have to work your theory ahead of the one that the war started when Ukraine dropped a nuke on Red Square and Russia had no choice but to retaliate. When you make your theory more popular than that one, then yours can move up the ladder.

    so you’re saying there’s a chance!

    Absolutely! If people can believe the CIA coup theory, there’s a chance for every other theory as well. :-)

    I’m in danger of becoming a sea lion on this thread. I’ll stop now at this moment of warm agreement.

     

    • #13
  14. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    What we have are Euros and Zelensky who want us to send weapons, money, and troops but shut up and let them run things. This is Biden’s mess, not Trump’s. Also, Trump told the Euros to build up their defenses. They didn’t listen.  Trump has to clean up their mess.

    • #14
  15. Randy Weivoda Moderator
    Randy Weivoda
    @RandyWeivoda

    David Foster (View Comment):

    Imagine that South Korea had had very valuable mineral deposits…and Eisenhower had decided *not* to leave US forces in S Korea after the ceasefire, but to strike a deal for mining concessions, resulting in a few hundred or maybe a few thousand American civilians resident there.

    Would North Korea have attacked again, or would they have been deterred by the likelihood of killing Americans and triggering a violent American response?

    United States investors are one of – if not the – largest foreign investors in South Korea right now, and it doesn’t stop North Korea from making beligerant threats against South Korea or the USA.

    • #15
  16. GPentelie Coolidge
    GPentelie
    @GPentelie

    Doug Watt (View Comment):
    As terrible as it sounds every dead Russian soldier is one who will not reach the border of Poland, Finland, Norway, and the Baltic States.

    Wishing death upon millions in order to prevent a hypothetical scenario from occurring doesn’t just sound terrible. It is terrible. Actually, “terrible” is too mild. It is utterly monstrous.

    Here’s an analogous statement, the monstrosity of which you might wish to mull over:

    “As terrible as it sounds, every dead n***** is one who will not get a chance to rape a white woman.”

    See what I mean?

    • #16
  17. Kozak Member
    Kozak
    @Kozak

    GrandpaPublius: So, America told the South Koreans it had to agree to a ceasefire or America would leave.

     

    America fought to regain the pre war boundary, then agreed to the cease fire.

    There are no Americans dying.

    And there is no “China” ready to fight to the last chinese for RuZZia.

    • #17
  18. Doctor Robert Member
    Doctor Robert
    @DoctorRobert

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Doug Watt (View Comment):
    As terrible as it sounds every dead Russian soldier is one who will not reach the border of Poland, Finland, Norway, and the Baltic States.

    Wishing death upon millions in order to prevent a hypothetical scenario from occurring doesn’t just sound terrible. It is terrible. Actually, “terrible” is too mild. It is utterly monstrous.

    Here’s an analogous statement, the monstrosity of which you might wish to mull over:

    “As terrible as it sounds, every dead n***** is one who will not get a chance to rape a white woman.”

    See what I mean?

    The dead Russian soldiers were engaged in a war against civilians.  Their deaths are part of the planning. Your hypothetical n*****s are innocent civilians just minding their own business.

     

    • #18
  19. GPentelie Coolidge
    GPentelie
    @GPentelie

    Doctor Robert (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Doug Watt (View Comment):
    As terrible as it sounds every dead Russian soldier is one who will not reach the border of Poland, Finland, Norway, and the Baltic States.

    Wishing death upon millions in order to prevent a hypothetical scenario from occurring doesn’t just sound terrible. It is terrible. Actually, “terrible” is too mild. It is utterly monstrous.

    Here’s an analogous statement, the monstrosity of which you might wish to mull over:

    “As terrible as it sounds, every dead n***** is one who will not get a chance to rape a white woman.”

    See what I mean?

    The dead Russian soldiers were engaged in a war against civilians. Their deaths are part of the planning. Your hypothetical n*****s are innocent civilians just minding their own business.

     

    Utterly BS attempt at distracting from the grotesque nature of wishing death upon people based on what one imagines they might do in the future.

    • #19
  20. Doctor Robert Member
    Doctor Robert
    @DoctorRobert

    Unintended duplicate posting

    • #20
  21. Doctor Robert Member
    Doctor Robert
    @DoctorRobert

     

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Doctor Robert (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Doug Watt (View Comment):
    As terrible as it sounds every dead Russian soldier is one who will not reach the border of Poland, Finland, Norway, and the Baltic States.

    Wishing death upon millions in order to prevent a hypothetical scenario from occurring doesn’t just sound terrible. It is terrible. Actually, “terrible” is too mild. It is utterly monstrous.

    Here’s an analogous statement, the monstrosity of which you might wish to mull over:

    “As terrible as it sounds, every dead n***** is one who will not get a chance to rape a white woman.”

    See what I mean?

    The dead Russian soldiers were engaged in a war against civilians. Their deaths are part of the planning. Your hypothetical n*****s are innocent civilians just minding their own business.

     

    Utterly BS attempt at distracting from the grotesque nature of wishing death upon people based on what one imagines they might do in the future.

    Have it your way, but this ain’t Burger King.

     

    • #21
  22. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    Randy Weivoda (View Comment):

    David Foster (View Comment):

    Imagine that South Korea had had very valuable mineral deposits…and Eisenhower had decided *not* to leave US forces in S Korea after the ceasefire, but to strike a deal for mining concessions, resulting in a few hundred or maybe a few thousand American civilians resident there.

    Would North Korea have attacked again, or would they have been deterred by the likelihood of killing Americans and triggering a violent American response?

    United States investors are one of – if not the – largest foreign investors in South Korea right now, and it doesn’t stop North Korea from making beligerant threats against South Korea or the USA.

    Bluster and threats, yes. Another invasion with an army, no.

    • #22
  23. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Doctor Robert (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Doug Watt (View Comment):
    As terrible as it sounds every dead Russian soldier is one who will not reach the border of Poland, Finland, Norway, and the Baltic States.

    Wishing death upon millions in order to prevent a hypothetical scenario from occurring doesn’t just sound terrible. It is terrible. Actually, “terrible” is too mild. It is utterly monstrous.

    Here’s an analogous statement, the monstrosity of which you might wish to mull over:

    “As terrible as it sounds, every dead n***** is one who will not get a chance to rape a white woman.”

    See what I mean?

    The dead Russian soldiers were engaged in a war against civilians. Their deaths are part of the planning. Your hypothetical n*****s are innocent civilians just minding their own business.

     

    Utterly BS attempt at distracting from the grotesque nature of wishing death upon people based on what one imagines they might do in the future.

    You two are arguing over each other, One is upset over that Russian troops have engaged in unspeakable acts against civilians. The other sees young men forcefully pressed into the Russian military against their wishes and sent to a meat grinder  war. These men are no different than the Russian athletes we love on our hockey teams, the Russian dissidents who have made it to the US and now entertain us with their comic routines or political cartoons, the ice skaters we love to watch. You are both reacting to the ugliness of war. 

    • #23
  24. GPentelie Coolidge
    GPentelie
    @GPentelie

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Doctor Robert (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Doug Watt (View Comment):
    As terrible as it sounds every dead Russian soldier is one who will not reach the border of Poland, Finland, Norway, and the Baltic States.

    Wishing death upon millions in order to prevent a hypothetical scenario from occurring doesn’t just sound terrible. It is terrible. Actually, “terrible” is too mild. It is utterly monstrous.

    Here’s an analogous statement, the monstrosity of which you might wish to mull over:

    “As terrible as it sounds, every dead n***** is one who will not get a chance to rape a white woman.”

    See what I mean?

    The dead Russian soldiers were engaged in a war against civilians. Their deaths are part of the planning. Your hypothetical n*****s are innocent civilians just minding their own business.

     

    Utterly BS attempt at distracting from the grotesque nature of wishing death upon people based on what one imagines they might do in the future.

    You two are arguing over each other, One is upset over that Russian troops have engaged in unspeakable acts against civilians. The other sees young men forcefully pressed into the Russian military against their wishes and sent to a meat grinder war. These men are no different than the Russian athletes we love on our hockey teams, the Russian dissidents who have made it to the US and now entertain us with their comic routines or political cartoons, the ice skaters we love to watch. You are both reacting to the ugliness of war.

    You’re replying to a third guy: me, who’s the one pointing out that wishing the death of people based on what one imagines they might do in the future is monstrous.

    • #24
  25. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Doctor Robert (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Doug Watt (View Comment):
    As terrible as it sounds every dead Russian soldier is one who will not reach the border of Poland, Finland, Norway, and the Baltic States.

    Wishing death upon millions in order to prevent a hypothetical scenario from occurring doesn’t just sound terrible. It is terrible. Actually, “terrible” is too mild. It is utterly monstrous.

    Here’s an analogous statement, the monstrosity of which you might wish to mull over:

    “As terrible as it sounds, every dead n***** is one who will not get a chance to rape a white woman.”

    See what I mean?

    The dead Russian soldiers were engaged in a war against civilians. Their deaths are part of the planning. Your hypothetical n*****s are innocent civilians just minding their own business.

     

    Utterly BS attempt at distracting from the grotesque nature of wishing death upon people based on what one imagines they might do in the future.

    You two are arguing over each other, One is upset over that Russian troops have engaged in unspeakable acts against civilians. The other sees young men forcefully pressed into the Russian military against their wishes and sent to a meat grinder war. These men are no different than the Russian athletes we love on our hockey teams, the Russian dissidents who have made it to the US and now entertain us with their comic routines or political cartoons, the ice skaters we love to watch. You are both reacting to the ugliness of war.

    You’re replying to a third guy: me, who’s the one pointing out that wishing the death of people based on what one imagines they might do in the future is monstrous.

    You are half the argument, they one the other half. Do you disagree with my comment?

    • #25
  26. GPentelie Coolidge
    GPentelie
    @GPentelie

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Doctor Robert (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Doug Watt (View Comment):
    As terrible as it sounds every dead Russian soldier is one who will not reach the border of Poland, Finland, Norway, and the Baltic States.

    Wishing death upon millions in order to prevent a hypothetical scenario from occurring doesn’t just sound terrible. It is terrible. Actually, “terrible” is too mild. It is utterly monstrous.

    Here’s an analogous statement, the monstrosity of which you might wish to mull over:

    “As terrible as it sounds, every dead n***** is one who will not get a chance to rape a white woman.”

    See what I mean?

    The dead Russian soldiers were engaged in a war against civilians. Their deaths are part of the planning. Your hypothetical n*****s are innocent civilians just minding their own business.

     

    Utterly BS attempt at distracting from the grotesque nature of wishing death upon people based on what one imagines they might do in the future.

    You two are arguing over each other, One is upset over that Russian troops have engaged in unspeakable acts against civilians. The other sees young men forcefully pressed into the Russian military against their wishes and sent to a meat grinder war. These men are no different than the Russian athletes we love on our hockey teams, the Russian dissidents who have made it to the US and now entertain us with their comic routines or political cartoons, the ice skaters we love to watch. You are both reacting to the ugliness of war.

    You’re replying to a third guy: me, who’s the one pointing out that wishing the death of people based on what one imagines they might do in the future is monstrous.

    You are half the argument, they one the other half. Do you disagree with my comment?

    Before I can agree or disagree, I need to know: What do you think my “half” of the argument is?

    • #26
  27. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Doctor Robert (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Doug Watt (View Comment):
    As terrible as it sounds every dead Russian soldier is one who will not reach the border of Poland, Finland, Norway, and the Baltic States.

    Wishing death upon millions in order to prevent a hypothetical scenario from occurring doesn’t just sound terrible. It is terrible. Actually, “terrible” is too mild. It is utterly monstrous.

    Here’s an analogous statement, the monstrosity of which you might wish to mull over:

    “As terrible as it sounds, every dead n***** is one who will not get a chance to rape a white woman.”

    See what I mean?

    The dead Russian soldiers were engaged in a war against civilians. Their deaths are part of the planning. Your hypothetical n*****s are innocent civilians just minding their own business.

     

    Utterly BS attempt at distracting from the grotesque nature of wishing death upon people based on what one imagines they might do in the future.

    You two are arguing over each other, One is upset over that Russian troops have engaged in unspeakable acts against civilians. The other sees young men forcefully pressed into the Russian military against their wishes and sent to a meat grinder war. These men are no different than the Russian athletes we love on our hockey teams, the Russian dissidents who have made it to the US and now entertain us with their comic routines or political cartoons, the ice skaters we love to watch. You are both reacting to the ugliness of war.

    You’re replying to a third guy: me, who’s the one pointing out that wishing the death of people based on what one imagines they might do in the future is monstrous.

    You are half the argument, they one the other half. Do you disagree with my comment?

    Before I can agree or disagree, I need to know: What do you think my “half” of the argument is?

    The latter.

    • #27
  28. GPentelie Coolidge
    GPentelie
    @GPentelie

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Doctor Robert (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    Doug Watt (View Comment):
    As terrible as it sounds every dead Russian soldier is one who will not reach the border of Poland, Finland, Norway, and the Baltic States.

    Wishing death upon millions in order to prevent a hypothetical scenario from occurring doesn’t just sound terrible. It is terrible. Actually, “terrible” is too mild. It is utterly monstrous.

    Here’s an analogous statement, the monstrosity of which you might wish to mull over:

    “As terrible as it sounds, every dead n***** is one who will not get a chance to rape a white woman.”

    See what I mean?

    The dead Russian soldiers were engaged in a war against civilians. Their deaths are part of the planning. Your hypothetical n*****s are innocent civilians just minding their own business.

     

    Utterly BS attempt at distracting from the grotesque nature of wishing death upon people based on what one imagines they might do in the future.

    You two are arguing over each other, One is upset over that Russian troops have engaged in unspeakable acts against civilians. The other sees young men forcefully pressed into the Russian military against their wishes and sent to a meat grinder war. These men are no different than the Russian athletes we love on our hockey teams, the Russian dissidents who have made it to the US and now entertain us with their comic routines or political cartoons, the ice skaters we love to watch. You are both reacting to the ugliness of war.

    You’re replying to a third guy: me, who’s the one pointing out that wishing the death of people based on what one imagines they might do in the future is monstrous.

    You are half the argument, they one the other half. Do you disagree with my comment?

    Before I can agree or disagree, I need to know: What do you think my “half” of the argument is?

    The latter.

    Elaborate, please.

    • #28
  29. MarciN Member
    MarciN
    @MarciN

    GrandpaPublius: There was no permanent and lasting peace agreement. The bad guys were not punished. Justice was not done. Not only was a country divided, families were divided. South Koreans were made to watch as their Northern relatives were subjected to horrific oppression.

    Why would you wish this on the people of Ukraine? 

    That is not a good ending. 

    We’ve seen throughout the world what the victors do in such situations many times over in the past fifty years. 

    We should be smarter now. 

    We can’t change the past. But we can learn from it and do better in the future. 

    • #29
  30. Yarob Coolidge
    Yarob
    @Yarob

    Red Herring (View Comment):
    This is Biden’s mess, not Trump’s. Also, Trump told the Euros to build up their defenses. They didn’t listen.  Trump has to clean up their mess.

    There’s a case to be made that this is Obama’s mess, not Biden’s. The lame US response to Russia’s invasion of Crimea in 2014 undoubtedly convinced the evil Russian midget that the US was a paper tiger and he could do what he liked with the world order. Trump cleaning up the mess seems to consist of indulging his hatred of Z and Ukranians generally and preemptively giving Putin whatever he thinks the latter might demand. Even now Trump is “seriously considering” new sanctions on Russia instead of actually imposing them. Whoop-de-do!

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.