Posted on 05/11/2024 7:40:54 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
If re-elected, would Donald Trump end U.S. support for Ukraine? He certainly sounds as if he would. On the campaign trail, he routinely describes Ukraine as a burden to the U.S. and declares his eagerness to see the war end, which he promises to achieve through negotiations in a mere 24 hours. Trump has also made clear his admiration for Vladimir Putin and dismissive attitude toward the European Union. Many observers worry that once back in office, he would condone, tacitly or even directly, Russia’s efforts to dominate Ukraine.
But it wouldn’t be an easy move for Trump to make, and there is reason to believe that his rhetoric on Ukraine is more political bluster than plan of action.
Trump’s dislike of Ukraine has many sources. It stems in part from his first impeachment trial in 2019, when he was charged with interfering in the 2020 election by putting pressure on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to announce an investigation of Joe Biden. The subsequent war in Ukraine has provided ammunition for one of Trump’s longstanding foreign policy complaints: that the U.S. does too much and Europe too little for Europe’s security. He has even suggested that the U.S. wouldn’t come to the defense of allies who don’t do their share for NATO. And of course there is the politics of aid to Ukraine: Democrats champion Ukraine and revile Russia, inspiring some in Trump’s orbit to do the opposite—to make Russia a synonym for strong leadership and to decry Ukraine as corrupt and parasitical.
Against this backdrop, it is instructive to scrutinize Trump’s actual record on Russia and Ukraine. Much of what he said about the two countries on the campaign trail in 2016 had little or no bearing on the actions he took as president.
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
SpaceX has developed reusable rockets which have revolutionized the satellite industry and set new price points
Jet fighters are nice. But that is not going to work for Ukraine in this war.
The Russians will just bomb all the bases that the Ukrainians have parked their jets.
Then what?
The Russians are destroying Ukraine's infrastructure.
Drones are the way to go. You can mass produce the drones cheaply. And it's easier to hide the drones so the Russians can't bomb them.
The Ukrainians are bombing the oil refineries in Russia right now. That's smart because they are trying to stop Putin from funding his war machine. You do that by taking out his oil infrastructure.
Blah, blah, blah WSJ. You and all the rest of the detractors.
Ukraine ping
Minority Republican: [Jet fighters are nice. But that is not going to work for Ukraine in this war.
The Russians will just bomb all the bases that the Ukrainians have parked their jets.
Then what?
The Russians are destroying Ukraine’s infrastructure.
Drones are the way to go. You can mass produce the drones cheaply. And it’s easier to hide the drones so the Russians can’t bomb them.
The Ukrainians are bombing the oil refineries in Russia right now. That’s smart because they are trying to stop Putin from funding his war machine. You do that by taking out his oil infrastructure.]
The US bombed Serbia without eliminating its air force. During Desert Storm, the US bombed Iraq without eliminating its air force. (Iraq’s problem was an inability to get fresh supplies. Ukraine doesn’t have that problem). It dropped more bombs on Iraq than Russia has dropped on Ukraine during its entire war so far. Russia doesn’t have the capacity to come close to matching the US performance during Desert Storm, incomplete as it was.
A big part of Russia’s problem is money. The US spent $60b for ~1 month of war. Adjusted for inflation, that’s $150b. That paid for operating ~1500 warplanes in the theater, 100K sorties. Whereas Russia’s incremental war expense for Ukraine is not even $60b, with the lion’s share of that soaked up in salary expense. Combat pay of $24K per year for 1m troops in-country vs peacetime pay of about $4K - good for morale, but one reason Russia is fielding golf carts and motorcycles in place of armored fighting vehicles. And it is why Russia’s air force sortie rate per month in Ukraine is well under 1,000, two orders of magnitude smaller than Desert Storm.
More Liberal attempts to spook MAGA Voters. Sorry Charlie, it will not work. Trump will not start WW III. He said he wouldn’t and unlike any Democrat or Media hypster, I believe him.
Thanks Zhang Fei.
Trump opposes war by strength, not weakness like Obama did.
Trump unleashed a massive buildup and upgrade of our nuclear weapons capability, cancelled the INF treaty with Russia, and because of the constant nuclear threats Putin has been making during this invasion Trump wanted to send nuclear subs to threaten him, to shut him up while wanting Ukraine to get the jets Biden was holding back.
Trump also reactivated V Corps and moved it forward to Poland and conducted American training exercises inside of Ukraine while telling NATO to build-up and end dependence on Russian energy.
Still making the effort...two minutes for Chasiv Yar:
https://youtu.be/hL-0l8rnw3c?si=TnALkl7y-C2yTmDB
Another Demonizing LIE from a GloboHomoPedo Legacy America Hating Shill.
Is Ruzzia weak or is Ruzzia Strong?
Still waiting for your answer.
I hope you wait until you drop.
Such a simple question. Can’t figure out how to answer?
Is Ruzzia Weak or is Ruzzia Strong
This is the problem with misguided Russia lickers.
You make up meaningless little paradigms and then think that answers something.
Tell me which of these are “strong” or “weak”:
Israel
Britain
Taiwan
India
Stupid question.
As though the author has any experience in foreign matters.
The only thing stupid in you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.