NYPost: White House ‘open’ to Ukraine joining NATO in jab at Russia
The White House said Thursday that it’s keeping the door “open” to Ukraine joining NATO, in the latest escalation of tensions with Russia.
President Biden plans to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin next month during his first trip abroad since taking office — after Russia allegedly massed troops near Ukraine.
NATO members are committed to collective defense, meaning the US would be obligated by treaty to fight Russia on Ukraine’s behalf.
Read more ....
Update: US: NATO ‘door remains open’ to nations that meet conditions (Al Jazeera).
WNU Editor: In the meantime the U.S. will continue to ship military equipment to Kiev .... U.S. Considering 'Additional' Military Assistance To Ukraine, Blinken Tells RFE/RL (RFE).
18 comments:
if Russia is an existential threat to the US, why is the US so desperate to risk escalation with Russia by getting involved in Ukraine?
you would kiss the bully's ass. that is what keeps bullies doing what they do
That's a good question.
nope. not good question. dumb one
Is it then that we should not ship military equipment to Kiev? might upset Putin? Russia hacks the elections and what not and we should not upset Putin?
Only to you.
Russia has 7,000 nuclear warheads.
Anon (4:07),
I think it is certainly a reasonable question. I suspect it is to protect business deals of Mitt Romney's partners and God only knows how many other well connected US officials and/or former top US officials. Certainly the corrupt, chump government of Ukraine does not seem worth such an escalation. As to the other points, it requires us to accept the premise that Russia is the "bully" in this situation, that Russia hacked our elections, and that the Chamberlin situation preceding WW2 actually applies in this situation. I am not convinced of any of this and would need much more evidence before I would authorize actions that will place my loved ones in danger.
I think what is more applicable is John Adams speech about not going through the earth looking for "monsters" to slay. At a minimum, it should be asked of any prospective NATO member to commit to standing shoulder to shoulder with America when we are invaded. I would not trust Ukraine or most other members of NATO to be this committed. Frankly they look to me like the usual users, abusers, and grifters that pass for our "allies" these days.
In any event, I don't think we need to be concerned with Ukraine joining NATO. Whether it is a good idea or not I don't think other Western European members of NATO are going to go along with this as, ethically or not, they have business deals including not insignificant oil deals with Russia that they are going to want to protect that would seems to serve the interests of their citizens far more than the chump Ukrainian government does.
ExxonMobil had negotiated something like a 500 billion dollar oil deal with Russia at one time. Due to the Ukrainian situation a perfectly good oil deal that likely would have benefited both countries is now lost or so it would seem. It's hard to imagine anything that Mitt's business partners have is worth anywhere near that. At present, it appears they sold out our interests for limited and temporary financial gain. Unfortunately they seem either to stupid or ideologically blind to recognize this.
There needs to be a very good reason to risk American lives and our national interests. In this case, it could lead to a shooting war that we may not be able to win, can't readily afford, and even if we do "win" nothing of value is gained for the effort. I'm just not seeing the justification for this and it makes more difficult that untrustworthy individuals seem to be the ones who are pushing this.
Russian fool's attack now
(1) Russia has 7,000 nuclear warheads.
China has between 55 to 400 nukes, which does not include MIRV'd warheads. They have enough plutonium for 1,000 warheads. We are told after a few thousand warheads the rest are kind of superfluous, I kind of agree. All Chinese data is dated and they have a growing economy. Nuclear wise, China is 16% to 33% as much of a threat as Russia, nuclear-wise. But it is growing.
(2) Russia might have been at it longer and have more experience in espionage operations and maybe more people in place or who are fellow travelers, but on the spy front I believe China has the edge in numbers and money.
(3) China has numbers that Russia does not have.
I believe China is the greater threat.
China has 2 great weaknesses, oil and food.
America has 3 great weaknesses, out sourced manufacturing in general, outsourced electronics and and more people with woke degrees than technical degrees.
It might all be academic. America's greater threat might be transforming into Wokistan before dissolving into a pile of shit.
Caecus at 4:07 is entirely correct to ask this question and so far the leadership class has yet to provide a reasonable answer in my considered opinion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
Ah, the Lapides crowd chimes in with it's unique way.
Keep trying.
You sure told James, lololololololo!
Frightened boomers still mad at Russia for making them hide under their desks during the Johnson era will always see Russia as a bully. It's programming.
Lololololololo!
You sure you you have the correct James? Lololololololo!
Post a Comment