Russian Invasion of Ukraine

[breeminator]

We cannot achieve peace by rewarding an aggressor for their initiation of violence.

Rewarding the initiator of violence encourages future initiation of violence.

We need to make the consequences of initiating violence so intolerable that nobody wants to initiate violence.

This seems to be understood when dealing with "normal" crimes such as murder, and forgotten (by some people) when dealing with war.

Roosevelt understood it in 1941:

"[17] No realistic American can expect from a dictator’s peace international generosity, or return of true independence, or world disarmament, or freedom of expression, or freedom of religion–or even good business.

[18] Such a peace would bring no security for us or for our neighbors. “Those, who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”"

FDR, "The Four Freedoms," Speech Text - Voices of Democracy

FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT, 1941 STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS “THE FOUR FREEDOMS” (6 JANUARY 1941) [1] Mr. President, Mr. Speaker, Members of the Seventy-seventh Congress: [2] I address you, the Members of the members of this new Congress, at a moment unprecedented in the history of the Union. I use...

voicesofdemocracy.umd.edu

The kind of deal that is being talked about for Ukraine is the temporary safety Roosevelt warned of.

 

[dcmo3]

We cannot achieve peace by rewarding an aggressor for their initiation of violence.

Rewarding the initiator of violence encourages future initiation of violence.

We need to make the consequences of initiating violence so intolerable that nobody wants to initiate violence.

This seems to be understood when dealing with "normal" crimes such as murder, and forgotten (by some people) when dealing with war.

Roosevelt understood it in 1941:

"[17] No realistic American can expect from a dictator’s peace international generosity, or return of true independence, or world disarmament, or freedom of expression, or freedom of religion–or even good business.

[18] Such a peace would bring no security for us or for our neighbors. “Those, who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”"

FDR, "The Four Freedoms," Speech Text - Voices of Democracy

FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT, 1941 STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS “THE FOUR FREEDOMS” (6 JANUARY 1941) [1] Mr. President, Mr. Speaker, Members of the Seventy-seventh Congress: [2] I address you, the Members of the members of this new Congress, at a moment unprecedented in the history of the Union. I use...

voicesofdemocracy.umd.edu

The kind of deal that is being talked about for Ukraine is the temporary safety Roosevelt warned of.

The war is over, and Ukraine lost. Continuing it any further only leads to the total destruction of Ukraine. Nothing is going to regain lost territory that Russia doesn't want to give up.

This isn't 1941, things have changed. Countries back then didn't have the ability to destroy the entire world (note on 18 - these are Benjamin Franklin's words, FDR merely plagiarized them).

This isn't our war, and the U.S. has already gotten way too involved. For the U.S. to get directly involved in the war, means ultimately it goes nuclear (whether us or them with the initial strike). If England and France want this war, they can have it, but they'll be on their own.

 

[UKMikey]

Spoken like a true surrender monkey.

 

[Liquid]

Rewarding the initiator of violence encourages future initiation of violence.

This is what Trump and Putin want though.

This isn't our war

As a signatory to the Budapest Memorandum, it is. Unhappy with the Budapest Memorandum? The United States has long declared itself the greatest democracy in the world, the leaders of the free world and the World Police, self-aggranding titles it loved to rub in everyone else's faces. Now's the time to actually prove it.

Or is the United States' word worth nothing? With the current state of US politics, I think everybody already knows the answer.

 

[breeminator]

The war is over, and Ukraine lost. Continuing it any further only leads to the total destruction of Ukraine. Nothing is going to regain lost territory that Russia doesn't want to give up.

Russia was in a terrible position until Trump withdrew US support. NATO has long had a policy of nations specialising, so full capability is only possible when member nations work together. With hindsight, the rest of NATO should never have allowed themselves to be so reliant on US support, but the withdrawal of US support currently switches off a lot of NATO capability. While Ukraine is not a full NATO member, it's also not just some random country, it has a long history of NATO partnership:

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_37750.htm

Withdrawal of US support is, frankly, shocking, and is going to have a long term negative impact on the US arms industry as why would any other nation purchase military equipment from the US from now on? Countries are already realising their F-35s can effectively be switched off whenever the US wants and are concerned about the issue.

Russia cannot sustain their military effort. All the West had to do was continue their support until Russia's position becomes so bad that withdrawal is the best option. Russia's GDP is tiny, the total combined GDP of NATO member countries is approx 26x Russia's GDP.

(And, as mentioned above, there is of course the US commitment under the Budapest Memorandum)

 

[McLaren]

Yet another member with bad conservative takes who comes and goes, has come to give his bad conservative take before going back to playing GT7.