Then why were there no problems when Trump was president? Did Ukraine and Russia just take a time out? Don’t think so. It was the USA that took the time out.
The US is always fighting countries. The CIA’s budget is said to be as much as the Air Force, Army, and Navy combined. The reason is the cost of building militaries in other countries. The term is conflicts. So, who started the conflict in Ukraine?
I didn’t find what you said was there.
I did find this somewhere else
There is no written record of a pledge in 1990 not to extend NATO beyond Germany. The content of the Treaty on the Final Settlement With Respect to Germany that was signed in September 1990 by East Germany, West Germany, the USSR, the United States, France and the United Kingdom, shows that the negotiations on German reunification were solely about the future of the reunified Germany and did not involve discussion about the future composition of NATO, apart from in relation to eastern Germany. The only commitment codified in the treaty pertaining to NATO was the provisions in Article 5 that when the reunified Germany joined the Alliance, the territory of the former East Germany would be given a special military status, guaranteeing that non-German NATO troops would not be stationed in eastern Germany. Nothing about the issue of NATO enlargement into other Eastern European countries was included in the treaty.
Yea, I know what you’re saying. It is like reading religion. Some items are understood at the time written. But confusing latter on.
In number 4. Key words: “Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapons state party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons”.
To understand that you have to go to. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), 1968
That will take you to:
With 191 member states, the NPT is hailed as the most comprehensive arms control treaty in history. The ultimate purpose of the Treaty (and the elaborate international regime that grew around it) is for no new nuclear states to emerge beyond the five—United States, USSR/Russia, China, France, and the United Kingdom—that had already developed nuclear weapons at the time the NPT came into force.
Harvard Professor Bryan Hehir characterizes the NPT as a combination of three elements: a contract, a promise, and a pledge. The contract in the NPT comprises a two-fold obligation: nuclear possessors undertake steps to prohibit the transfer or control of nuclear weapons to non-nuclear weapons states (Article I), and non-nuclear weapon states agree not to receive, manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons (Article II). Nuclear weapon states then promise that they will help facilitate the development of civilian nuclear applications with all interested parties of the Treaty (Article IV). Finally, they pledge that they will conduct negotiations towards general and complete disarmament (Article VI).
So, if Russia is selling nuclear fuel to Ukraine. Which it is. Only if Ukraine keeps it NPT agreement. Which Biden is trying to get them to break.
Timeline: On April 20th, 2022
On 20 April Rosenergoatom announced that it would change Zaporizhzhia’s fuel from US-made to Russian fuel, following a report that the US Department of Energy had sent a letter saying that the occupied plant in Ukraine “contains US-origin nuclear technical data that is export-controlled by the United States Government”.
The US taxpayers are paying Westinghouse to build Ukraine new reactors to replace all the old ones. So Ukraine can use USA made nuclear fuel. Meanwhile we are buying 30% of our nuclear fuel from Russia. Note; Westinghouse is a Bermuda company.
Boiling it all down. Ukraine agreed to no nuclear and Russia (one of the five countries) agreed not to sell nuclear fuel to any countries that break the NPT agreement. Russia is still selling nuclear fuel to Ukraine.
Ukraine has 15 reactors making about half of Ukraine’s electricity.
NATO is nuclear. Therefore, my understanding is that Ukraine agreed not to join NATO. And if it does, it will break the NPT agreement, then no fuel for the reactors.
The key points is that Russia problems are with the US. Russia and Ukraine were each others biggest and best trading partners before US actions. Meanwhile the US is trying to rebuild Ukraine.
The best history on this is in the Wilson Center
And where do you get this understanding?
Why MAGA love Putin and hate Ukraine ?
[https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/08/opinion/why-maga-loves-russia-and-hates-ukraine.html]
But it goes further still. To MAGA, Putin isn’t just innocent; he’s admirable. Heroic, even, in some ways. He isn’t defined as an authoritarian dictator at the helm of one of America’s chief geopolitical rivals. No, he’s defined as an anti-woke leader who defends Christian civilization by taking on the decadent West.
Jordan Peterson, meanwhile, went so far as to imply that Russia’s aggressive attack may have been merely self-defense against the threat of Western cultural decadence. The culture war, he mused, may be “serious enough to increase the probability that Russia, say, will be motivated to invade and potentially incapacitate Ukraine merely to keep the pathological West out of that country, which is a key part of the historically Russian sphere of influence.”
There is an old saying: The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Ideally, the phrase means that Americans set aside their domestic differences to address foreign threats to the nation. But in this hyperpolarized era, the far right gets this equation precisely backward. They are aiding Vladimir Putin because they see him, too, as opposed to their domestic enemies.
You’re right.
Is the USA at war with Russia?
Is Ukraine a proxy?
Proxy Wars
The Washington Post
Closer to the fighting – What does Europe think?
INSTITUT DE RELATIONS INTERNATIONALES ET STRATÉGIQUES (IRIS)
La guerre russo-ukrainienne, catharsis de deux conflits convergents
According to this article, the Russo-Ukrainian War is the catharsis of two converging conflicts. First, the Russian-American confrontation which, given the nuclear deterrent, has so far been expressed in all areas except the military, finds a “proxy” army. Then the irreducible confrontation, since the independence of Ukraine, of two cultures and political projects dividing this country into two enemy geopolitical groups (Donbass versus the rest of Ukraine).
ATLANTIC COUNCIL
Proxy war or not, Ukraine shows why moral hazards matter.
It is easy to dismiss Lavrov’s claim (of NATO waging a “proxy” war against Russia) as another product of Kremlin myth-making. Yet there is a kernel of truth to it: the Alliance is now engaged in a Cold War-style engagement with Moscow. For the author, whether the US and its NATO partners are in a textbook proxy relationship with Ukraine matters less than the potential consequences if that relationship is not properly managed.
INSTITUTO ESPAÑOL DE ESTUDIOS ESTRATÉGICOS
War in Ukraine, a punch on the international chessboard
This article analyses the military invasion of Ukraine in the context of geopolitics, seeing the invasion not as the beginning of a new global ordering model, but one more chapter in the long-standing competition between great powers. What is new is the possibility of escalation in the conflict that could lead to direct confrontation between Russia and the North Atlantic Alliance, without any proxies.
Read the post just before your posting. It’s right there. And the proof is there too. Russia has to keep selling nuclear fuel to Ukraine. If Russia stopped then 1/2 of Ukraines electricity would be out. The NPT was in 1968. The Ukraine treaty came after that. If Ukraine allows any of five nuclear nations forces or NATO on their land or any nuclear weapons. Then the treaty is broken. That is why the US is taking one nuclear plant from the US to Ukraine and rebuilding 15 nuclear generator with new reactors in Ukraine to use USA nuclear fuel. The Zaporizhzhia plant will no doubt stay in the New Russian oblasts.
Can you find another article that says the same thing? I cannot open that article without joining NYTimes.
My opinion is that a psychologist that sells books is being used by the NYTimes to try and bring up sales. The NYTimes is in trouble.
So is that your viewpoint that the Ukraine War is taking place for a therapy reason.
Is Jordan Peterson a MAGA? He is said to be a conservative.
Can you finish answering the basic questions. It is best to know the history of subject and how it got to where it is at today.
I can not speak for the MAGA. But it is obvious that only one side has any morals. And it ain’t the US.
It’s not. What I like about you Mike, is that you describe in detail how you construct your theories. Your leaps of logic are like watching gymnastics.
Why would anyone take what is written in the NYT as serious journalism?
[quote=“mikeyohe, post:61, topic:10688”]
Then why were there no problems when Trump was president? Did Ukraine and Russia just take a time out? Don’t think so. It was the USA that took the time out.
[/quote] And Russia took advantage. These things develop over time.
This is not a case of someone spitting on the sidewalk. These invasions take years to plan. The respite that Trunp “forged” allowed Putin to prepare for invading Ukraine.
Putin completely misjudged Biden by thinking Biden is weak, Instead, Biden assembled all the NATO nations to help “defend” Ukraine against Russia’s aggression.
Note that the US is maintaining a defensive posture. No country wants the US to seriously attack them. Look at what happened to Iraq.
But if you think that Trump prevented Putin from acting aggressively you are dead wrong.
[quote=“mikeyohe, post:62, topic:10688”]
The US is always fighting countries. The CIA’s budget is said to be as much as the Air Force, Army, and Navy combined. The reason is the cost of building militaries in other countries. The term is conflicts. So, who started the conflict in Ukraine?
Russia, of course. Putin fired the first shot and at civilians in Ukraine’s Capitol at that.
Russian invasion of Ukraine
The invasion, described as the biggest attack on a European country since the Second World War, began at dawn on 24 February. Russia launched a simultaneous ground and air campaign, commencing air and missile strikes across Ukraine, with some rockets reaching as far west as Lviv.
To accuse the US of starting anything is false and seditious. All the money the CIA spends on National Defense is to help in predicting what is required for defense, not for invading other countries. The CIA by definition does not wage war. It is an Intelligence gathering organization, not a war machine.
My theory is Putin was waiting for the election, and if Trump won, this would have been a very short war with Russians in Kiev now.
1 Like
So it is Russia fighting NATO? You are aware to the collapse of ukraines frontlines and zelenskys sacking of it top military commander and replaced with an unpopular head?
The main part of the paper 
But it goes further still. To MAGA, Putin isn’t just innocent; he’s admirable. Heroic, even, in some ways. He isn’t defined as an authoritarian dictator at the helm of one of America’s chief geopolitical rivals. No, he’s defined as an anti-woke leader who defends Christian civilization by taking on the decadent West.
In a 2017 speech at Hillsdale College, the Claremont Institute’s Christopher Caldwell declared that if “we were to use traditional measures for understanding leaders, which involve the defense of borders and national flourishing, Putin would count as the pre-eminent statesman of our time.” In Caldwell’s words, Putin “is not the president of a feminist NGO. He is not a transgender-rights activist. He is not an ombudsman appointed by the United Nations to make and deliver slide shows about green energy.”
In 2021, The American Conservative’s Rod Dreher praised a Putin speech condemning the West and said that Putin and Hungary’s Viktor Orban were “completely clear and completely correct on the society-destroying nature of wokeness and postliberal leftism.” (It should be noted that Dreher has nonetheless unequivocally condemned Putin’s invasion.) A 2022 exchange between Steve Bannon and Erik Prince, the founder of private military contractor Blackwater, was even more illustrative. Bannon hosted Prince on his podcast shortly after Putin’s invasion and proclaimed Putin “anti-woke.” Prince replied supportively that the people of Russia “still know which bathroom to use.” And Bannon kept the thought alive, asking, “How many genders are there in Russia?”
Jordan Peterson, meanwhile, went so far as to imply that Russia’s aggressive attack may have been merely self-defense against the threat of Western cultural decadence. The culture war, he mused, may be “serious enough to increase the probability that Russia, say, will be motivated to invade and potentially incapacitate Ukraine merely to keep the pathological West out of that country, which is a key part of the historically Russian sphere of influence.”
There is an old saying: The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Ideally, the phrase means that Americans set aside their domestic differences to address foreign threats to the nation. But in this hyperpolarized era, the far right gets this equation precisely backward. They are aiding Vladimir Putin because they see him, too, as opposed to their domestic enemies.
Before the war, MAGA’s combination of hostility toward Ukraine and admiration of Putin created a very particular narrative: Rugged, manly, traditional Russia was physically and spiritually stronger than the liberalizing West, and it would roll over Ukraine with only token resistance. Indeed, before the war, Ted Cruz shared a tweet in which he contrasted Russian and American military ads. The U.S. ad, he claimed, showed our military to be “woke” and “emasculated.” But the Russian ad reeked of masculine aggression. How could the West — let alone tiny Ukraine — stand against such manly men?
Yes, Putin has stated this clearly. He does n’t want NATO on Russia’s doorstep. So he is creating a “buffer zone” inside Ukraine before Ukraine is allowed to join NATO .
This is accurate enough. The dissident Right in America likes Putin because he is the opposite of liberal.
Nikki haley , john bolton, chris christie, lindsey Graham, liz cheney et al must be the rational good repubicans because they want war with Russia
Netanyahu tells biden to F/ off after bombing rafah
Nobody wants war with Russia. And you know it.
Dont gaslight. Stop that
Johnny the warporn Bolton
“I think we should have had more American forces in Ukraine, not to fight the Russians but to train with the Ukrainians, and to show those Russian generals looking across the border and seeing American flags,” Bolton told Mitchell. “Biden took that off the table, saying there would be no American forces involved, and he got nothing for it.”