[ConservativeInPA]

None of that us true. In fact, the U.S. has officially guaranteed Ukrainian security since the Budapest agreement in 1994 -- almost 30 years ago, under Pres. Clinton.

I am going to be polite and explain my point of view. Here’s a bit of a civics lesson. 1.) The Budapest Memorandum is not a treaty. 2.) It is not a document that can even be ratified by Congress. 3.) If you take the time to read the Budapest Memorandum you will find that there is only one requirement of the U.S. in regards to Ukraine. That is refer any aggression to the United Nations. 4.) Ergo, it is a meaningless document because the United Nations does not set U.S. foreign policy. Read that as abdicating foreign policy to a proxy in a document that has no basis under the U.S. Constitution.

Defense obligations to foreign nations are made by treaties. The Constitution sets a very high bar to enter a treaty. It is one of the many checks and balances. What individuals promise, particularly Presidents, are meaningless without the consent of the people’s representatives. In this case, a meaningless promise by Clinton and the State Department doesn’t mean shit. Even following the obligation detailed in the Budapest Memorandum is meaningless. The UN is not capable of defending anyone. And then there is the little, itty bitty problem that Russia has a permanent seat on the UN Security Council. Granted, Clinton and the State Department were hideously stupid at foreign policy, but they are not so stupid to know the UN would do nothing tangible in regards to the Budapest Memorandum. The Budapest Memorandum has zero standing at the UN and even if it did, Russia has their veto.

Perhaps you can explain to me why Zeepers like you love to cite unconstitutional memorandum from Democrats and the deep state as a reason to waste billions of dollars that we don’t have. Why is it that Zeepers like you follow the lead of Democrat Presidents, like pedophile Joe Biden? Why do you think America needs to send aid and weapons to nations around the world when there has been no tangible and positive affect for everyday Americans that actually pay the bills?

I don’t care if it is George W. Bush, Donald Trump, Obama, Biden or Clinton. Individual Presidents have be carrying on the foreign policy objectives of the unelected administrative state at the State Department and the Pentagon for my entire life. I do not care if aid and weapons have been given to the world for decades. Time does not make it right. It is not right today just because it happened in the past.

Every interest you list as an American interest in Ukraine is not an American interest. Let’s take them one by one:

1.) Relative to Russia, Ukraine is the more genuine constitutional democracy, is less corrupt or ruled over by a murderous dictator.

I don’t give a chit about Democracy. Democracies are antithetical to the American Republic. Ukraine being less corrupt than Russia is not an American interest. American interests have tangible, positive impacts on everyday American lives. Spending American tax dollars on two corrupt nations at war does not improve one hardworking American’s life. It contributes to inflation and makes Americans debt slaves.

2.) Ukrainians love Europe, the EU and NATO more than Russians ever did. Ukrainians want to be independent Europeans, not slaves to Asian Russians.

Love for Europe, the EU and NATO is not an American interest. Even if that was the case, you are incorrect about that love. The Russian speaking eastern provinces in Ukraine do not share that love. By the way. I do not love Europe, the EU and NATO. They all act against the interests of American taxpayers every single day. I find the idea of using emotions as the basis of foreign policy as being completely hideous. It lacks all critical thinking.

3.) In 1994 the USA formally guaranteed Ukrainian sovereignty in the Budapest Memorandum.

I have already converted that. Maybe Biden could actually fulfill our non-responsibility from a meaningless, non treaty and refer the Ukraine-Russian matter to the United Nations. The Budapest Memorandum is not an American interest. It does not change any American’s life in any way.

4.) Ukraine was invaded, unprovoked, by Russians, twice now, in 2014 and again in 2022. No western country recognises the legitamacy of Vlad the Invader's "Special Military Operations".

Stating that Russia’s, or any other country’s, aggression as an American interest is not American interest. There needs to be something in Ukraine that positively impacts American lives to be an interest. That “something” needs to be significant. What does Ukraine have that we so desperately cannot live without. What do and have the Ukrainian people do on behalf of the American people that affects our lives in such a significant way that we neglect our own problems and go deeper in debt?

As for no western county recognizing Russian legitimacy, that is not an American interest. Who really cares about what other countries think in determining what is good for America. If those other counties’ interests are so abused, then they should use their tax dollars and their weapons to fight Russia. They are much closer to the problem.

5.) Vlad's invasion is not just a "one-of" exception, rather it's his normal behavior towards virtually all his neighbors, including Georgia and Moldova invaded plus a long list of others he's threatened.

That’s not an American interest. Moldova and Georgia are not American interests. 95+% of Americans can’t find them on a map. There are no treaties with them. They do nothing for America.

You need to be consistent in principles. Each year there are tens of military actions in the world where an aggressor nation attacks another. The vast majority of these conflicts have little or nothing at stake for Americans. Russia’s aggression against Georgia and Moldova obviously did not require response from our government since their are no American interests. How is that any different than the tens of other nations embroiled in conflict and Ukraine? Shouldn’t we be consistent and get involved in every conflict in the world? C’mon, let’s choose sides and invent American interests in every conflict. We need to be consistent in our principles.

All of these are none of our business. Every one of these would be a waste of American tax dollars and have a negative impact on our economy and degrade the strength of our military. Yes, sending Ukraine our weapons degrades our military’s strength.

6.) There is a new "Axis of Evil" growing ever more powerful in the world, beginning with Vlad the Invader and the CCP's Xi-snake, and including Little Kim and the Moolah Mullahs plus others. All are aggressive, brutal dictators only constrained by the U.S. and our allies' strengths -- military, economic, political and social. All can smell weakness, fear and disunion amongst us and will move aggressively against us the moment they believe we are too weak to stop them.

You are partly correct. However, it was our support of Ukraine that drove Russia into a stronger alliance with China. It was NATO expansion of nations that border of Russia that made Russia act rationally and seek allies elsewhere.

Just imagine having Russian or Chinese military bases in Mexico. Given that you are such a proponent of American security, as I am, you would not tolerate those military bases.

Throughout the entire Cold War, there were non NATO buffer nations between Western Europe and Russia. That worked out pretty well considering the Soviet Union fell and there was not a hot war. But after the end of the Soviet Union fell, the West, particularly Europe, did little to improve relations with Russia and bring Russia back into the European theater of interest. Europe continued to engage in Cold War behavior and expanded NATO. NATO is a military alliance. NATO since its inception has been a military threat to Russia. We didn’t ease tensions with a fallen Soviet Union. We increased them. NATO expansion means military bases closer to Russia. It is provocative in the same way a Russian or Chinese military base would be in Mexico.

That was America fault, because America is the primary funder of NATO, that was intimidating a defeated enemy instead of trying to diplomatically bring Russia into alliance with the West.

American foreign policy decisions are NOT always correct just because they are American. There are many forces at play and the least of which are everyday Americans, whose interest should trump all others. Continuing to make foreign policy mistakes like supporting Ukraine drives Russia into unnatural alliances with nations such as China. That falls directly under the category of the enemy of my enemy is my friend. We are Russia’s enemy because we didn’t do the right things following the fall of the Soviet Union. It’s our own damn fault that Russia and China are closer. It seems like no one did the math because they were so intent on getting filthy rich by the prospect of doing business in China. And somehow China was our friend. That math here is keeping as few fighting aged men not aligned with China. Russia is a huge source of fighting aged men.

You don’t keep them unaligned through war. It is done through diplomacy. It’s done through finding mutual interests. It is done by establishing trust, one step at a time. We have done the opposite and have doing so from the fall of the Soviet Union when Russia was in abject shambles and was completely weak militarily. We doubled down on a nonexistent threat instead of mending relations at time when Russia was wanting to have greater positive engagement with the West.

7.) Ukraine is only one place among many we've been challenged. If we fail in Ukraine, each new challenge will become that much more difficult to defeat. That is the lesson taught in the deaths of millions after the 1930s, and should not ever need re-teaching.

Your premise is completely incorrect. We have not been challenged in Ukraine. It is only the insistence by neocons and people like you that imagine there are American interests in Ukraine.

Back your time line up on the death of millions. It was prior to the 1930’s. It occurred in Wilson’s War, and before that. The death of millions, proportionally to world population, has been occurring since the beginning of history. It is not the excuse to wage war to kill millions more.

Direct to that point, by America fighting a proxy war with Russia with Ukraine has cost the death and permanent crippling of hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian. You don’t want death, but you cause death because you imagine non-existent American interests in Ukraine. This war would have long been over without American involvement. It could have never occurred if NATO dissolved after the fall of the Soviet Union.

In fact millions of people would not have been killed or injured if the U.S. acted in behalf of real American interests instead of imaginary American interests. There would have not been a Korean War. There were no American interests in Korea. There would have not been a Vietnam War. There were no American interest in Vietnam. There would not have been the forever wars of the last couple of decades. Yes, even the War on Terror was a complete waste of American tax dollars and lives. Our government did nothing to eliminate terrorism. In fact, they have done many things that have reduced Americans’ freedoms and security. We were lied to about weapons of mass destruction just enter yet another conflict that did nothing to eliminate terrorism.

9/11 was an immigration problem. Those hijacking terrorists should never have been in America.

Personally, I never viewed Saudi Arabia or any other ME country beside Israel as being a friend. They are antithetical to our culture and interests. They should never have been allowed to visit or immigrate to America.

American interests start at home, here on U.S. soil. They begin with our freedoms. They begin with our economy. But neocons look outwards for imaginary American interests to fuel the Military Industrial Complex instead of solving problems at home where we actually have American interests. That needlessly kills and injures Americans. It reduces our freedoms. It makes us less secure. It makes us debt slaves.

Our nation’s leaders and military cannot walk and chew gum. You cannot identify any major war that we have won since WWII. You cannot say we have greater freedom today than in the past. You cannot argue how America has a culture that is notin decline. Every major institution in America is being destroyed by leftist freaks and somehow neocons think those institutions are going to make wise decisions in the interest of Americans.

Our most pressing problems are right here in America and they need to solved before doing a damn thing in places where there are no American interests. Our Constitution does not grant any power making our government the world’s cop. For the life of me I cannot understand why neocon are so insistent on trying to be the world’s cop particularly so many failures and defeats. It is the definition of insanity.

[BroJoeK]

ConservativeInPA: "Here’s a bit of a civics lesson.

• 1.) The Budapest Memorandum is not a treaty.
• 2.) It is not a document that can even be ratified by Congress.
• 3.) If you take the time to read the Budapest Memorandum you will find that there is only one requirement of the U.S. in regards to Ukraine.
  That is refer any aggression to the United Nations.
• 4.) Ergo, it is a meaningless document because the United Nations does not set U.S. foreign policy. Read that as abdicating foreign policy to a proxy in a document that has no basis under the U.S. Constitution."

I agree with you that if you close your eyes and wash your hands of Ukraine, you can by logical trickery convince yourself that we never really promised Ukraine anything meaningful in the Budapest Agreement.

The problem with your argument is that in 1994 Ukraine gave away assets of immeasurable value -- it's stockpile of nuclear weapons -- in exchange for what?
Empty meaningless promises from our Pres. Slick Willy?
I don't think so.
I think those promises were worth something at the time and should be considered binding on us today -- not as a mutual defense treaty, but certainly as a pledge to support Ukrainian independence and sovereignty.

ConservativeInPA: "Defense obligations to foreign nations are made by treaties.
The Constitution sets a very high bar to enter a treaty.
It is one of the many checks and balances.
What individuals promise, particularly Presidents, are meaningless without the consent of the people’s representatives."

I agree, but of course, Congress has many times affirmed our promises to aid Ukraine's war of independence, so that is not the issue.

We can also notice that there are many other countries around the world who we feel obliged to support militarily, but with whom we have no formal mutual-defense treaties.
Those include Israel and Taiwan, for starters and all the arguments made against Ukraine can equally apply to such other countries.

If we now ignore such past commitments, what then becomes of the post-WWII "Pax-Americana" and how quickly does the world descend into chaos and wars?

ConservativeInPA: "Perhaps you can explain to me why Zeepers like you love to cite unconstitutional memorandum from Democrats and the deep state as a reason to waste billions of dollars that we don’t have.
Why is it that Zeepers like you follow the lead of Democrat Presidents, like pedophile Joe Biden?
Why do you think America needs to send aid and weapons to nations around the world when there has been no tangible and positive affect for everyday Americans that actually pay the bills?"

If you are to label me a "Zeeper", then I'll label you by your true name, "Putinista" how do you like that name, pal?

There is nothing unconstitutional about the 1994 Budapest Agreement because it simply expressed our administration's policies at the time.
So, has any administration since then changed, abolished or modified such policies?
Has Congress ever refused to grant a President's requests in fulfillment of such policies?

Obviously, the answers are "no, the Clinton policies remain in effect today, as confirmed by every succeeding President and Congress."

Legally, the 1994 Budapest Agreement is equivalent to a presidential executive order which remains in effect until changed or abolished by a future president.
And every president since 1994 has, in effect, confirmed Slick Willie's promises to Ukraine.

Those include Republican presidents like Bush II and Trump as well as unsuccessful candidates like Dole, McCain and Romney.
Now, say whatever you wish about those Republicans, they were not cut out of the same cloth as Slick Willie, O'Bama or O'Biden.

ConservativeInPA: "I don’t care if it is George W. Bush, Donald Trump, Obama, Biden or Clinton.
Individual Presidents have be carrying on the foreign policy objectives of the unelected administrative state at the State Department and the Pentagon for my entire life.
I do not care if aid and weapons have been given to the world for decades.
Time does not make it right.
It is not right today just because it happened in the past."

Sure, I understand your point here, but Presidents are elected and do have authority to continue or abolish policies of their predecessors.
All presidents and Congresses since the 1994 Budapest Agreement have effectively confirmed Slick Willie's promises to Ukraine.

You can't just blame the "administrative state" for what presidents and congresses authorize.

ConservativeInPA: "I don’t give a chit about Democracy.
Democracies are antithetical to the American Republic.
Ukraine being less corrupt than Russia is not an American interest.
American interests have tangible, positive impacts on everyday American lives.
Spending American tax dollars on two corrupt nations at war does not improve one hardworking American’s life.
It contributes to inflation and makes Americans debt slaves."

So, one by one...

Small-d democratic principles are included in the American Republic ideals.
We use the term "democratic" as opposed to "authoritarian" or "dictatorship" or "tyranny of the elites", etc.
We are a republic, not a democracy, but we do abide by common democratic principles.

Russia and China are effectively authoritarian dictatorships while Ukraine is much closer to democratic ideals as practiced in Europe and America.

It matters because more democratic countries are nearly always more peaceful and friendly to us.
More authoritarian countries are inevitably more aggressive and dangerous to us.

You are talking about "tangible results" but peace is always a tangible result and nearly always better than chaos and war.
Peace only results from strength and engagement, never from cowardice and withdrawal.
When we and our allies are strong, bad-actors like Vlad the Invader don't mess with us or our friends.

When we are weak, stupid and corrupt, we become an open invitation for all the world's bad-actors to walk all over our smaller friends around the world, examples now being Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan.

As for the wreck of the US economy by the Biden administration, that is not an accident or failure by them, it's their intention and a success of their policies.
It has nothing to do with Ukraine and everything to do with their radical leftist agenda.

Ukraine is not causing us any problems, rather it's the radical leftist agenda spending of $trillions on insanities that are causing every problem you witness.
So eliminating Ukraine will not solve any other problem.
Only eliminating our Democrat administration and Senate can begin to set the country on the right path again.

ConservativeInPA: "Love for Europe, the EU and NATO is not an American interest.
Even if that was the case, you are incorrect about that love.
The Russian speaking eastern provinces in Ukraine do not share that love.
By the way.
I do not love Europe, the EU and NATO.
They all act against the interests of American taxpayers every single day.
I find the idea of using emotions as the basis of foreign policy as being completely hideous.
It lacks all critical thinking."

There are no "Russian speaking eastern provinces", that is a myth of Russian propaganda.
The real truth is that most Ukrainians speak the Russian language, but nearly zero Ukrainians want to be part of Russia.
Those who seriously did have long since left Ukraine to become Russian citizens in Russia.
So, they have no rights to claim in Ukraine.

As for your personal likes and dislikes, they are irrelevant to the fact that the USA has enjoyed the deep friendship and support from European countries since almost Day One, beginning with critical military and economic aid from the Netherlands, France and Spain in the Revolutionary War, and including our allies in the World Wars.
Today they are our trading partners and allies, we visit each others' countries and together we maintain what I call, "Pax Americana" since the Second World War.

That is what you are so eagerly preparing to throw away and return the world to an age of chaos & war similar to that before the 1940s.

Peace and prosperity are tangible benefits and only come through our strength and strong alliances.

ConservativeInPA: "The Budapest Memorandum is not an American interest.
It does not change any American’s life in any way."

The Budapest Memorandum helps maintain world peace by holding aggressive dictators in check, and that benefits every American every day.

ConservativeInPA: "Stating that Russia’s, or any other country’s, aggression as an American interest is not American interest.
There needs to be something in Ukraine that positively impacts American lives to be an interest.
That “something” needs to be significant.
What does Ukraine have that we so desperately cannot live without.
What do and have the Ukrainian people do on behalf of the American people that affects our lives in such a significant way that we neglect our own problems and go deeper in debt?"

To repeat to be clear, Ukraine has nothing to do with -- zero, zip, nada to do with -- our current political and economic chaos.
Those are strictly the results of radical leftist policies, that are not Biden Administration failures, they are features of radical leftism.
Ukraine has no effect on that one way or the other.

Russian aggression in Ukraine and anywhere else challenges and jeopardizes the "Pax Americana" we and our allies have maintained since 1945.
It has resulted in the longest peace and prosperity in world history and if we abandon that, the world will quickly return to much darker times of chaos, warfare and empire-building, just as Vlad the Invader has announced his intentions to do.

Peace only comes through strength, weakness only provokes defeat and chaos.

ConservativeInPA: "As for no western county recognizing Russian legitimacy, that is not an American interest.
Who really cares about what other countries think in determining what is good for America.
If those other counties’ interests are so abused, then they should use their tax dollars and their weapons to fight Russia.
They are much closer to the problem."

The issue here is whether there is any justification for Vald the Invader's "special military operation" in Ukraine -- legal, moral, ethical or otherwise -- and in that the fact that no serious country recognizes Vlad's conquests is an important consideration.

ConservativeInPA: "You need to be consistent in principles.
Each year there are tens of military actions in the world where an aggressor nation attacks another.
The vast majority of these conflicts have little or nothing at stake for Americans.
Russia’s aggression against Georgia and Moldova obviously did not require response from our government since their are no American interests.
How is that any different than the tens of other nations embroiled in conflict and Ukraine?
Shouldn’t we be consistent and get involved in every conflict in the world? C’mon, let’s choose sides and invent American interests in every conflict.
We need to be consistent in our principles."

Sure, and here is consistent -- if a small African country like, say Uganda somehow attacks maybe Kenya, then we have no major interests beyond humanitarian and diplomatic efforts to bring them to negotiated settlements for the sake of peace in Africa and world economic concerns.

But when the world's largest and most dangerous empire, Russia, bullies, threatens, attacks and invades its neighbors for the stated purpose of expanding its already enormous empire, that is a very different situation.
In the example of Ukraine, Russian victory would add about one third to Russia's population and economy, making Russia all the more difficult to stop in it's next great adventure in foreign conquest.

The historical lesson of the 1930s is that aggressive dictators must be stopped & defeated before they grow so strong that it costs a World War and tens of millions killed to finally defeat them.

Oppose them now in Ukraine, or oppose them later at much higher costs in blood and treasure.

ConservativeInPA: "You are partly correct.
However, it was our support of Ukraine that drove Russia into a stronger alliance with China.
It was NATO expansion of nations that border of Russia that made Russia act rationally and seek allies elsewhere."

All of that is pure Russian propaganda lies.
The truth is that Pres. Clinton & other NATO leaders urged both Yeltsin and Putin to join NATO in the 1990s.
Russian membership in NATO would eliminate all possibility of NATO being a threat to Russia.

And Yeltsin chose the path of NATO membership, but Putin eventually stopped and then reversed it, turning NATO from his friend into his enemy.
Putin did that on his own, having nothing to do with other countries also joining NATO.

Among the countries NOT interested in joining NATO was Ukraine, who wished to keep good relations with everybody, NATO or not, until, until, until... until Vlad the Invader did his thing in Crimea in 2014 and since then Ukrainians have overwhelmingly wanted to join NATO.

And Ukraine will most likely join NATO at some point, thanks to Vlad's "special military operations".

ConservativeInPA: "Throughout the entire Cold War, there were non NATO buffer nations between Western Europe and Russia.
That worked out pretty well considering the Soviet Union fell and there was not a hot war.
But after the end of the Soviet Union fell, the West, particularly Europe, did little to improve relations with Russia and bring Russia back into the European theater of interest.
Europe continued to engage in Cold War behavior and expanded NATO. NATO is a military alliance. NATO since its inception has been a military threat to Russia.
We didn’t ease tensions with a fallen Soviet Union.
We increased them.
NATO expansion means military bases closer to Russia.
It is provocative in the same way a Russian or Chinese military base would be in Mexico."

All of that is 100% bunk and nonsense, just Russian propaganda koolaid that nobody should ever take seriously.

The key fact to remember is that Russia itself was on a path to join NATO in the 1990s and early 2000s, and only Putin's threats and aggressions took Russia away from NATO, turning friendship and cooperation into competition and enmity.

While Russia was planning to join NATO, other eastern European countries also planned and then did join NATO, why should they not?
At a time when defense spending in Europe was barely 1% of GDP in many countries, NATO was not a serious military threat to anybody, just a formality, to go along with the European Union membership.

So the whole idea that NATO threatened Russia is pure propaganda bunk and should be discarded entirely.
Vlad the Invader decided on his own, instead of joining NATO, he would threaten and turn NATO into his enemy.

ConservativeInPA: "American foreign policy decisions are NOT always correct just because they are American.
There are many forces at play and the least of which are everyday Americans, whose interest should trump all others.
Continuing to make foreign policy mistakes like supporting Ukraine drives Russia into unnatural alliances with nations such as China."

Seriously? Are you stupid? Do you know nothing of history?

Communist Russia and Communist China have been allies since World War II. They fought together in Korea and Vietnam, they support each other with military hardware and training all this time.

Yes, they did have occasional disputes, but it was Vlad's choice to restore the old Soviet-ChiCom alliance that had set the world in fear when Vlad was a young KGB agent in East Germany.
Vlad chose China over NATO, not because NATO drove him away, but because Vlad is an Old Soviet KGB, and that's what the Old Soviets did.

It's not complicated and it's not our fault.

ConservativeInPA: "You don’t keep them unaligned through war.
It is done through diplomacy.
It’s done through finding mutual interests.
It is done by establishing trust, one step at a time.
We have done the opposite and have doing so from the fall of the Soviet Union when Russia was in abject shambles and was completely weak militarily.
We doubled down on a nonexistent threat instead of mending relations at time when Russia was wanting to have greater positive engagement with the West."

All that is total BS, complete cr*p, inspired by Russian propaganda Kool-Aid and nothing more.

The real truth is that Russia could have been, and could still be, our friend and ally, if they wanted to, but they don't, Vlad the Invader doesn't want to be our friend, he prefers us as enemies and China's CCP Xi-snake dictator as his friend and ally, along with Little Kim, the Moolah Mullahs and many other denizens of the Mos Eisley Cantina.

Hi John, thought you might like to see two Pennsylvanians going at it... ;-)