I would say that maybe the USA ( which is broke) shouldn't be sending billions and billions to help Ukrainians kill Russians. Oh wait! I remember now, Big Bad dictator Putin attacked vibrant democracy Ukraine, led by democratically elected spunky former comedian. Except that a few years into the war, Spunky comedian cancelled elections. Of course the prequel part of the story that is never told is that Ukraine was a CIA playground for decades before Russia invaded. We overthrew the previous Ukrainian government because they were allegedly "pro-Russian". We wouldn't rule out Ukraine joining NATO, a military alliance with Russia's declared adversaries.... I always say to my pro Ukraine friends: " Would America EVER accept that Mexico or Canada was in a binding military alliance with China?". No. So why should Russia accept that Ukraine is part of NATO? See Jeffrey Sach's videos for much much more...
Yes a dictatorship with eyes on restoring its former empire invaded a flawed but developing democracy.
How do you imagine holding free elections in a country in a state of war? Are there precedents?
Which country was not a CIA playground over the last few decades?
No "we" didn't overthrow the previous Ukrainian government (which wasn't elected in free elections)
If America had previously controlled the Canada and Mexico, installed communist puppet governments until they were overthrown, and was constantly threatening to carry out a military invasion of them, then perhaps we might understand that Canada and Mexico might be seeking some kind of protection from other democracies.
Are you really equating NATO with China?
And if you really believe that the US is "broke", just wait till the massive increase in debt resulting from the Big Beautiful Bill plays out.
Let me just point out that the United States held free elections during the Civil War and World War 2. As to your other points, I can only say watch the videos of Jeffrey Sachs, longtime insider, Columbia U, UN and John Meirsheimer of U Chicago, the most respected expert on international relations. They both refute all those points. I realize that the NY Times and WSJ make the same points as you do. But those are State dept and CIA talking points. Here is a link to Meirsheimer on why the invasion was the fault of the West: https://www.mearsheimer.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Why-the-Ukraine-Crisis-Is.pdf
I accept the Civil War (but do you happen to know what the percentage turnout was), but are you really comparing the situation of the US in WWII and Ukraine since 2022? How much of the US was under occupation then? How many missiles were landing on major cities? How many children had been abducted and taken to live in the invading country?
John Mearsheimer is about as far from a respected expert as you could get - unless you mean in the field of appeasing dictators.
World War 2 was pretty existential and the entire US economy was mobilized. NATO Is a military alliance. Would the USA ever accept that Mexico was in a binding military alliance with China or Russia ( and other countries - but which the USA was not part of)? Ukraine is Russia's backyard. Bill Burns the CIA director under Obama said that NATO membership for Ukraine was the reddest of red lines for Russia and should never happen.
John Meirsheimer is a tenured U Chicago professor of international relations, Jeffrey Sachs is also highly credentialed. Both can be considered as respected "experts." Both make a case, worth thinking about, that Putin had legitimate reasons for invading Iraq and that the war could have been prevented if the Minsk accords had been respected ( which they were not).
You didn't respond to any of my points about why the US experience during WWII and the invasion of Ukraine are fundamentally different, so I'll assume that you've accepted them.
The Obama administration let down Ukraine, and just because Bill Barr says something doesn't make it true or right. Is he still saying that?
We can both pull out names of respected experts that have opposing views, but do you really believe what Mearsheimer and co are saying? Sweden, Poland, Finland are all on Russia's doorstep and all are in NATO. Was there any invasion of Russian territory after they joined? Has NATO ever unilaterally attacked another country that was living in peace? Even Putin and his cronies haven't used the NATO threat as an important reason for invading Ukraine.
Until the invasion of Ukraine by Russia one could rely on the far left to trot out postmodern interpretations of history and decline to condemn the USSR or Russia (it's still happening) or even flatly blame the west. However, since 2022 it's been notable how many on the far right are now spouting the same tortured logic. It's been a perfect example of the horseshoe effect.
All of your points are addressed at length by the work of John Meirsheimer and Jeffrey Sachs. But I am not going to try to convince you. I do think its funny how being against a proxy war with the worlds second largest nuclear power is now considered a "far right" position.
Speaking for this anti war, and not "far right" voter, I have no illusions that Putin is some sort of good guy. I am not "pro Russian." I just think that their security needs should be respected. Bill Burns ( not Barr) CIA director said the same thing.
Surely you have noticed that the same neocons who were for the Iraq War, the Afghanistan War, the Syria war, ( Richard Perle, both Cheneys, Max Boot, etc) are all in for this war. Enjoy their company. Let's agree to disagree.
I would say that maybe the USA ( which is broke) shouldn't be sending billions and billions to help Ukrainians kill Russians. Oh wait! I remember now, Big Bad dictator Putin attacked vibrant democracy Ukraine, led by democratically elected spunky former comedian. Except that a few years into the war, Spunky comedian cancelled elections. Of course the prequel part of the story that is never told is that Ukraine was a CIA playground for decades before Russia invaded. We overthrew the previous Ukrainian government because they were allegedly "pro-Russian". We wouldn't rule out Ukraine joining NATO, a military alliance with Russia's declared adversaries.... I always say to my pro Ukraine friends: " Would America EVER accept that Mexico or Canada was in a binding military alliance with China?". No. So why should Russia accept that Ukraine is part of NATO? See Jeffrey Sach's videos for much much more...
Yes a dictatorship with eyes on restoring its former empire invaded a flawed but developing democracy.
How do you imagine holding free elections in a country in a state of war? Are there precedents?
Which country was not a CIA playground over the last few decades?
No "we" didn't overthrow the previous Ukrainian government (which wasn't elected in free elections)
If America had previously controlled the Canada and Mexico, installed communist puppet governments until they were overthrown, and was constantly threatening to carry out a military invasion of them, then perhaps we might understand that Canada and Mexico might be seeking some kind of protection from other democracies.
Are you really equating NATO with China?
And if you really believe that the US is "broke", just wait till the massive increase in debt resulting from the Big Beautiful Bill plays out.
Let me just point out that the United States held free elections during the Civil War and World War 2. As to your other points, I can only say watch the videos of Jeffrey Sachs, longtime insider, Columbia U, UN and John Meirsheimer of U Chicago, the most respected expert on international relations. They both refute all those points. I realize that the NY Times and WSJ make the same points as you do. But those are State dept and CIA talking points. Here is a link to Meirsheimer on why the invasion was the fault of the West: https://www.mearsheimer.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Why-the-Ukraine-Crisis-Is.pdf
I accept the Civil War (but do you happen to know what the percentage turnout was), but are you really comparing the situation of the US in WWII and Ukraine since 2022? How much of the US was under occupation then? How many missiles were landing on major cities? How many children had been abducted and taken to live in the invading country?
John Mearsheimer is about as far from a respected expert as you could get - unless you mean in the field of appeasing dictators.
I read neither the WSJ nor the NYT.
World War 2 was pretty existential and the entire US economy was mobilized. NATO Is a military alliance. Would the USA ever accept that Mexico was in a binding military alliance with China or Russia ( and other countries - but which the USA was not part of)? Ukraine is Russia's backyard. Bill Burns the CIA director under Obama said that NATO membership for Ukraine was the reddest of red lines for Russia and should never happen.
John Meirsheimer is a tenured U Chicago professor of international relations, Jeffrey Sachs is also highly credentialed. Both can be considered as respected "experts." Both make a case, worth thinking about, that Putin had legitimate reasons for invading Iraq and that the war could have been prevented if the Minsk accords had been respected ( which they were not).
You didn't respond to any of my points about why the US experience during WWII and the invasion of Ukraine are fundamentally different, so I'll assume that you've accepted them.
The Obama administration let down Ukraine, and just because Bill Barr says something doesn't make it true or right. Is he still saying that?
We can both pull out names of respected experts that have opposing views, but do you really believe what Mearsheimer and co are saying? Sweden, Poland, Finland are all on Russia's doorstep and all are in NATO. Was there any invasion of Russian territory after they joined? Has NATO ever unilaterally attacked another country that was living in peace? Even Putin and his cronies haven't used the NATO threat as an important reason for invading Ukraine.
Until the invasion of Ukraine by Russia one could rely on the far left to trot out postmodern interpretations of history and decline to condemn the USSR or Russia (it's still happening) or even flatly blame the west. However, since 2022 it's been notable how many on the far right are now spouting the same tortured logic. It's been a perfect example of the horseshoe effect.
All of your points are addressed at length by the work of John Meirsheimer and Jeffrey Sachs. But I am not going to try to convince you. I do think its funny how being against a proxy war with the worlds second largest nuclear power is now considered a "far right" position.
Speaking for this anti war, and not "far right" voter, I have no illusions that Putin is some sort of good guy. I am not "pro Russian." I just think that their security needs should be respected. Bill Burns ( not Barr) CIA director said the same thing.
Surely you have noticed that the same neocons who were for the Iraq War, the Afghanistan War, the Syria war, ( Richard Perle, both Cheneys, Max Boot, etc) are all in for this war. Enjoy their company. Let's agree to disagree.
Once upon a time, there was an entity within the US Department of Justice named
"The Office of Legal Counsel". How quaint.