Tanking Ukraine

My thought is that, more than any other reason, Putin invaded Ukraine because he thought Biden would let him get away with it. But now, the conflict has shown that Russia is not a major military power, but a Potemkin border wall hiding nothing but nukes, which I do not think Russians would let Putin get away with using against Ukraine. I personally find it morally sickening for us to basically sacrifice a population and a country for a proxy endeavor we refuse to fight in the name of weakening a military that is already weak. I think Congress should pass a bill or use whatever process is available to restrict the president from assisting foreign nations at war unless he says that U.S. boots on the ground is a possibility.

Milton Friedman relied on the phrase 'enlightened self-interest' and that seems to most certainly be the case that Lucretia makes.

Additionally, I've discovered that even in such places like 'Substack' which are supposedly more tolerant of a range of opinions, asking certain pro-Ukraine folks about corruption and whether it is even being discussed in the (not-very) free Ukraine press can get one rapidly branded as slavishly pro-Putin.

I am also surprised at how many of the once reliable 'Don't get involved in overseas adventures' Leftists/Liberals are now among the most gung ho pro-Zelenskyites out there.

The accompanying chart provided today prompts me to ask John and his like minded associates if they think there will be a 'tell' from Vlad if/when we have pushed him to the (no longer unthinkable) brink of him pushing the button? I am convinced that the intolerable legacy for him is not that he got merely stalemated in Ukraine but that he goes down as the (wannabe) new Czar who lost Ukraine

Leslie Watkins (View Comment):

My thought is that, more than any other reason, Putin invaded Ukraine because he thought Biden would let him get away with it. But now, the conflict has shown that Russia is not a major military power, but a Potemkin border wall hiding nothing but nukes, which I do not think Russians would let Putin get away with using against Ukraine. I personally find it morally sickening for us to basically sacrifice a population and a country for a proxy endeavor we refuse to fight in the name of weakening a military that is already weak. I think Congress should pass a bill or use whatever process is available to restrict the president from assisting foreign nations at war unless he says that U.S. boots on the ground is a possibility.

There is a bizarre line of reasoning I’ve seen, to the effect that abandoning the Ukrainians to their fate would be a favor to them!

It would indeed be “morally sickening for us to basically sacrifice a population and a country” — by walking away.

Dr.Guido (View Comment):

Milton Friedman relied on the phrase ‘enlightened self-interest’ and that seems to most certainly be the case that Lucretia makes.

Additionally, I’ve discovered that even in such places like ‘Substack’ which are supposedly more tolerant of a range of opinions, asking certain pro-Ukraine folks about corruption and whether it is even being discussed in the (not-very) free Ukraine press can get one rapidly branded as slavishly pro-Putin.

I am also surprised at how many of the once reliable ‘Don’t get involved in overseas adventures’ Leftists/Liberals are now among the most gung ho pro-Zelenskyites out there.

The accompanying chart provided today prompts me to ask John and his like minded associates if they think there will be a ‘tell’ from Vlad if/when we have pushed him to the (no longer unthinkable) brink of him pushing the button? I am convinced that the intolerable legacy for him is not that he got merely stalemated in Ukraine but that he goes down as the (wannabe) new Czar who lost Ukraine

To those of us who remember the Cold War, what I call the “corruption scam” is very familiar. Communists, and their supporters in the US, constantly used it to undermine support for friendly, anti-Communist governments. (In reality, the Communist countries were the most corrupt of all, but writing or even talking about it would get you sent to a slave labor camp.)

In perhaps the most egregious example, it was used to trick Harry Truman into not supporting our allies against Japan, the Chinese Nationalists, against Mao’s Communists (who had mostly sat out the war against Japan); even as Stalin supplied vast quantities of American munitions to the Communists.

So you can see why knowledgeable people would get a little short with anyone who tries to pull the old scam against Ukraine.

There’s also a wishful thinking (by Russia) element involved. If only the Ukrainians had been selling American munitions like the Javelin on the black market, then Ukraine wouldn’t be littered with burnt-out Russian tanks.

After listening to Lucretia, all I can say is repeat what she often says which is it was STUPID,STUPID,STUPID, just moronic, in what she said about Ukraine If we look back at Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan, we can see that they were immeasurably more corrupt and dramatically less effective than Ukrainians have been. The money and equipment that we sent to them instead of our troops is the best money we have ever spent in the military, as it is destroying the Russians. Lucretia should stick to the federalist papers because she knows little besides conspiracy theories about what is happening in Ukraine.