I can't find the posts now, but there were posters lamenting the GOP and them holding up Budgetary votes that include Ukraine Aid.
Let me remind folks of two things:
- NATO commitments asside, the US is not (immediately, directly) affected by Making Ukraine Russia Again or not. Russian ICBMs are no closer to the US than they were. This is a huge deal for Europe, matters fro real geopolitik, etc. But not that important to the day-to-day of America vs Europe.
- The sticking point was funding for securing the border. Biden was sending billions* in equipment to Ukraine to secure their borders, but doing nothing to stop or slow the flow of illegal immigrants into the US, and Biden (before getting DNC-dunked) was banking on Ukraine/Ukraine holding out against Russia as a big part of his reelection campaign.
So much as Scholz spiked billions in aid to try to keep his party from getting obliterated in German elections, and in the vein of the Tories getting steel-chaired by Labor**, the GOP had no intention of handing Biden a free PR coup because of internal politics beating out geopolitics.
*In DoD list prices
** who to my utter amazement, did not cuck
So I blame Biden for not willing to commit to securing the US border more than I blame folks with R after their name.
The plan above sounds serviceable, decent, but it is really unclear now that Trump would now endorse anything Putin wouldn't want.
That plan sounds like a recipe for a second 3 day military operation.
It's ironic that the people who fall for the China Containment meme are the same assholes who pushed ideas about realpolitik, offensive realism, and the natural inclination of states to expand their power. In their minds, a Russo-American alliance is perfectly feasible (and realistic!) despite Russia and China making no effort to disguise the fact that they are joined at the hip and have zero interest in changing that relationship.
No one except poli-sci homos care about that one time Mao and Corn Lord disagreed over whether or not Stalin was an asshole, let alone are naive enough to think that it sets the precedent for a military alliance that borders on fanfiction.
Mao had a huge gay crush on Stalin for whatever reason. He (rightly) chafed under every other soviet leader who tried to hold themselves out as the true voice of communism and treat China like another SSR. It was a very big split and almost came to blows.
But you are correct in the only way there is a Russo-American alliance is if Chinese boots are Siberia and would AT THE LONGEST last until that situation no longer existed.
And that was the case before China has turned Russia into a near client state due to being the only sizeable economy willing to supply Russia, and keep them supplies with things like chips and parts they so desperately need.
I legitimately, at one point in my naive time, thought a US-Russia alliance would be "based".
On paper its great. China's expansion is checked by attacks on Taiwan or Siberia being the same as attacks on the other.
But before get into the laughable state of Russia's military performance, it completely ignores the Asiatic mindset and while both Russia and China have territory disputes, their expansion plans don't seriously interfere with each other - not for a good long while.
General Kellogg is meeting with Zelenskyy in a few hours. Kellogg will probably have to start off with damage control: sorry about my boss, he runs his mouth sometimes.
You assume he's not there to explain how we'll have peace in out time.
I'm a fan of Trump on a lot of things (love the bullying of bureaucrats), but the recent comments are not great regarding Ukraine.
Agreed, but I'm still holding opinion until we see what is on offer.
And again, Ziggers are running their mouth, but the same government who claims to have destroyed 8,000 of the 30 M1 Abrams sent to Ukraine hasn't seized the situation or touted the incredible progress made and I find that telling.
So negotiations don't seem to be going to Russia's liking. Its also possible they are not wanting to interrupt an opponent when they are making a mistake.
You could interpret that as a nothingburger. Or you can also wonder why Trump doesn't have a tardwrangler anymore or that nobody even suggests any corrections to Donny. Just because Musk has normalized being inane on the social media for the rich and powerful, doesn't mean one should. The way the message is framed matters just as much as the message itself.
Yes, Euros are bad, Biden is senile and graft exists.
By saying nothing, you're just adding more urgency to whatever plans other countries and blocks have to unify their interests. And one day US might find itself in an entirely new position and the isolation that it wished for but now doesn't know what to do with.
This is why I say Trumplomacy isn't a sustainable model. It works when setting examples for those who took your kindness for weakness, but when its just all Big Stick you start getting folks legit resentful. And because its built all on low-cunning, its easy to circumvent if the other side knows what you're planning.
I guess, I don't take too much issue with Trump reminding Zelensky who is dependent on whom*, and understanding we only see what's in the press not what's happening behind the scenes.....
But there's no absolutely reason for him to be going hard on Zelensky.
*Well, too much. It would be one thing if Ukraine was just failing to prosecute a functional war, but they are holding their own against a larger military and the US troops aren't involved in combat. So especially given that Ukraine hasn't done anything publicly to buck the partyline, it seems very gauche to say the least to take him to task like that in the public forum.
