First, we obviously don’t have their nukes. Russia does.
***Russia left a bunch of nukes behind in that country. What stops US from doing the same thing, with the pretense that the nukes were there all along?
Second, there was never an agreement for us to defend Ukraine militarily,
***Niggling bullshiite. There is nothing in the agreement that says Ukraine is not allowed to drop a couple of nukes on Russian territory if they invade Ukraine, so that’s what I expect YOUR appeasement to lead to. And even then, I doubt folks holding your position will change their perspective on it, they’ll just hide under some rock.
so we could not have broken it. The Agreement amounted to each of the signatories promising that it would respect Ukraine’s borders. The U.S. and U.K. honored their obligations under the Agreement. It is Russia that did not.
***Then there is nothing stopping us from calling out that agreement, fighting Russians to their border, leaving behind a few nukes for the Ukes to play with, and asking the world to honor Uke neutrality when we leave. Other than the lack of will, encouraged by Putinists like yourself. Heck, we probably could do it with a few F35s, a few hundred Javelins, a bunch of stingers, and very few American dead just to satisfy the pantywaist appeasing Putinist pukes.
Wow -- I thought you were originally just making a rhetorical point focusing on how Russia unilaterally breached the Budapest Memorandum. But apparently, you are actually arguing seriously that we should hand the Ukrainians some of our active nukes so they can use them against Russia. I'm not really a fan of anyone handing out nukes to Ukraine or anyone else at this point, so I'm glad you're not the one setting policy.
Other than the lack of will, encouraged by Putinists like yourself. Heck, we probably could do it with a few F35s, a few hundred Javelins, a bunch of stingers, and very few American dead just to satisfy the pantywaist appeasing Putinist pukes.
Hahaha! I'm not sure what you think you've been reading, but that's the first time in the last couple weeks that I've been called an apologist for Putin. I have gotten called out for being a dupe of the "Deep State" for supporting Ukraine and Zalensky, though.
I'm absolutely in favor of selling/giving whatever conventional weapons we can to Ukraine. Including obtaining and then transferring MiG's to Ukraine. I'm also in favor of imposing the absolute hardest, most crippling sanctions possible on Russia. But if I'm nevertheless a "Putin apologist" because I don't want to hand nuclear weapons to the Ukrainians to use against Russia...then I guess I'm guilty as charged.