Utter nonsense. Ukraine is not a NATO member. And never will be. And no NATO member country has an existential interest there, with the US having no interests whatsoever.
As if France and the UK railing to stop the Nazis from taking over the Rhineland didn't cause an end of the mutual defence treaty between France and Belgium, or British and French failures to protect Czechoslovakia didn't lead to the Molotov-Ribentrop pact. In international relations, countries learn from precedent and broken promises. A failure of the US and UK to help Ukraine would have made NATO an empty promise.
PS. I have an IQ of 145. On 4 hours of sleep and 3 drinks, I'm still smarter than most people.
“Then we should give Ukraine nuclear weapons. Can’t have it both ways.”
Ukraine was anxious to get rid of their nukes, but they slow walked it to gain compensation. And don’t think for even a minute that Ukraine was ignorant of the legal status of the memorandum.
They knew then, before they signed it, that it was not legally binding in the US, Russia, UK or Ukraine. And not in International law either. However, they DID ratify the START I AND Non-proliferation treaties in their Rada...both legally binding in Ukrainian and International Law.
“An international memorandum hammered out over a year and two American administrations made between three major powers is more than a promise by Bill Clinton.”
In law, it is ONLY a promise by Bill Clinton. Nothing else.
“A failure of the US and UK to help Ukraine would have made NATO an empty promise.”
Ludicrous.
The NATO treaty would still be binding and trusted by all members if Ukraine was incinerated tomorrow. NATO, nor the US has made any promises of any kind to Ukraine.
Otherwise there would be a treaty. Absent a treaty it’s just another empty set of promises by a rogue POTUS.
TOO bad the high-powered IQ of yours didn’t give you knowledge.