https://twitter.com/Wilson__Valdez/status/1616154874328276992
I wouldn’t say owned but it’s a conversation
1 Like
Russia didn’t have any presence in Ukraine in 2012, very true. If history began in that year that’d be a compelling argument.
This is an interesting development as Burns is probably one of the least hawkish members of Biden’s cabinet. Is the CIA director in the cabinet? I don’t care, don’t correct me if wrong.
“Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all redlines for the Russian elite (not just [Vladimir] Putin),” he wrote. “I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine in NATO as anything other than a direct challenge to Russian interests.”
It sounds like the Russian elite (not just Putin) are the problem. The rest is just smoke-filled coffeehouse crap.
Sure? Same thing with any country though. US Americans in 1961 didn’t gaf if the Soviets were cozy with the Cubans. They had their own problems.
Man, if only there were precedent for the Soviets going to war with a country that bordered them and losing!
1 Like
The most equivalent thing is Cuba IMO which USA did let go. We were bastards to them and still are but we didn’t do what Russia is doing when Castro took power. Obviously there was a red line drawn at them getting nukes but not at them joining USSR sphere of influence and leaving ours
1 Like
Burns wrote that during the Bush administration. the rest of the article highlights how Burns’ point of view changed.
You’re just describing the more general problem of how to deal with powerful actors who make difficult, possibly irrational demands. I agree it’s a problem, I don’t have any novel thoughts about it, do you?
What if NATO declared that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was an existential threat to NATO. Maybe that’s irrational, maybe not, but if such a declaration were made, would you advise Putin not to risk it and pull out immediately to avoid general thermonuclear war?
The main and relatively narrow point I make here from time to time is that Russia’s “security concerns” in Ukraine have always been pure bullshit, make of that what you will but it’s the truth.
2 Likes
Ahem.
To be fair though, that was over after three days, and they didn’t drag it on after it failed.
1 Like
It’s kind of the equivalent of the Russian support for insurgency in the border areas. Or even Crimea. We only got here because those were successful.
If bay of pigs had worked. The US would have gone further for sure.
I.e. it was because they lost, not because they didnt want to.
2 Likes
I generally agree with Obama on this. Ukraine is a core interest of Russia and will never be a core interest of the US. If the US insanely tried to say that Ukraine is now a core interest then I think things will spiral quickly out of control. Would I advise Putin to back down? I guess maybe but he wouldn’t listen, even to me, his most loyal supporter and most trusted advisor. Because Obama is correct: Ukraine is a core interest of Russia. And if it’s all of the sudden a core interest of the US as well then its just war. Hope it doesn’t get too nuke-y.
Which is why I think US support for Ukraine is so dangerous. The deeper the US gets in supporting Ukraine, the more the US national reputation and world standing becomes tied up in it. It might not have started out as a core US interest but it could end up that way. From there it becomes hard to predict where things end up.
1 Like
Bay of Pigs would be more like Russia just leaving after their kill squad failed to find Zelensky in Kiev at the start of the conflict and then cutting off energy pipelines and closing borders.
1 Like
If preventing Russian expansion is a core interest of NATO, but not of the US, should the US leave NATO or is supporting NATO a core interest if the US?
1 Like
I mean the US isn’t going to leave NATO. I’d be fine with the US leaving NATO though, Europe can handle its own defense. It’s got 10 times the GDP as Russia.
The US being part of NATO keeps NATO countries and their allies from pursuing nuclear weapons.
UK and France already have nukes. Doesn’t really bother me if Germany gets nukes too.
Lol the atomic arsenal of France and GB wouldnt deter Russia in the slightest. As soon as US leaves NATO the Baltics are at great risk. There is only a narrow corridor between Belarus and Kaliningrad. Russia closes that off then Europe can do jackshit.