The impressment of British subjects with American citizenship by the Royal Navy was one of the literal causes of the War of 1812, in which we fought against the proverbial world hegemon of the time over this exact issue.
Now our government just sort of shrugs it shoulders and says "Oh well, sucks to be you, better follow their orders. When you get sent to the front, make sure to absorb as many artillery shells as you can!"
Oh, what a world.
History rhymes, except now inversely...
With any luck maybe the Vindman twins are in Ukraine. Send someone to collect their US passports.
There is an extremely high risk you will end up in a Ukie meat wave attack in Kharkov, with five minutes training and shoulder-to-shoulder with Ukie grade schoolers who thought they were going for ice cream and a sleep-over in Kharkov.
PING
A police officer I know is of Russian descent. He’s been to Russia twice, since this has started.
He’s been allowed to leave twice.
To me, that’s an indication of how things are going.
You should see some of the forced Ukrainian recruitment videos.
They are sad and funny.
If the US wanted to, Ukraine would do (((WHATEVER))) we ask of them. We installed many of the key leaders in that country probably including Mr Z. We arm them. We fund them. We feed them intel. We train them. We give them political back cover. We made sure the mercenaries could/can flow there. Most of their national debt is to us.
That nation is entirely dependent on us and of we were to tell them that American-Ukrainian dual nationals may leave, it would happen.
This is what a country does when it is losing a war. The Ukraine is losing or has already lost the war.
This seems incredibly desparate. I tried to find an estimate of how many Americans would be in the Ukraine right now but all I could find was a 2023 statistic claiming there were about 50,000 Americans visiting the Ukraine last year. Since those are travelers coming and going over the course of 12 months in 2023, I would think at any given time there wouldn’t be more than about 10,000. I think the number has to be much less than that at this point in the war. So the Ukraine needs a few thousand more fighters to stand up and hold a weapon to keep the ‘show’ going.
~~~
US citizens in Ukraine: how many foreigners came in 2023?
Visit Ukraine
https://visitukraine.today › blog › us-citizens-in-ukraine...
Feb 5, 2024 — In the ranking of countries from which foreigners most often came to Ukraine in 2023, the United States took 8th place. Thus, 50,374 foreigners .
Not surprising. Dual nationals are warned that the U.S. is limited to the assistance we can provide when they are in their other country.
We should eliminate dual nationality. Either you are an American or you are not.
[Under Ukraine’s martial law, men between the ages of 18 and 60 are not permitted to leave the country.]
To the last Ukrainian?
With any luck, the Vindmans will be thrown into the meat grinder...
“The U.S. Embassy is limited in our ability to influence Ukrainian law”
Maybe you could point out that you pay the bills, retirements, keep them alive, and provide their military nearly all it has.
Thanks, maybe we won’t have to put up with so many Zeepers here.
The Zelensky regime is now refusing to recognize American residency and is press-ganging American-Ukrainian dual citizens for his war against Russia.
This is the way it usually works. A person with dual citizenship owes total and complete allegiance to the state of nationality he is in. If it were someone they really want, and he flies into the airspace without intending to land in his second state of nationality, they could force the plane to land and drag him off. If the plane were forced to make an emergency landing, they could take him away. In the Steinkauler case, a German-American dual citizen in Germany could not get American assistance to avoid military service in Germany. Reviewed in Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939); Supreme Court.
This principle was clearly stated by Attorney General Edwards Pierrepont in his letter of advice to the Secretary of State, Hamilton Fish, in Steinkauler's Case, 15 Op. Attys. Gen'l, 15 (1875). The facts were these: One Steinkauler, a Prussian subject by birth, emigrated to the United States in 1848, was naturalized in 1854, and in the following year had a son who was born in St. Louis. Four years later Steinkauler returned to Germany taking this child and became domiciled at Wiesbaden where they continuously resided. When the son reached the age of twenty years the German Government called upon him to report for military duty and his father then invoked the intervention of the American Legation on the ground that his son was a native citizen of the United States. To an inquiry by our Minister, the father declined to give an assurance that the son would return to this country within a reasonable time. On reviewing the pertinent points in the case, including the Naturalization Treaty of 1868 with North Germany, the Attorney General reached the following conclusion:"Young Steinkauler is a native-born American citizen. There is no law of the United States under which his father or any other person can deprive him of his birthright. He can return to America at the age of twenty-one, and in due time, if the people elect, he can become President of the United States; but the father, in accordance with the treaty and the laws, has renounced his American citizenship and his American allegiance and has acquired for himself and his son German citizenship and the rights which it carries, and he must take the burdens as well as the advantages. The son being domiciled with the father and subject to him under the law during his minority, and receiving the German protection where he has acquired nationality and declining to give any assurance of ever returning to the United States and claiming his American nationality by residence here, I am of opinion that he cannot rightly invoke the aid of the Government of the United States to relieve him from military duty in Germany during his minority. But I am of opinion that when he reaches the age of twenty-one years he can then elect whether he will return and take the nationality of his birth, with its duties and privileges, or retain the nationality acquired by the act of his father. This seems to me to be 'right reason', and I think it is law."
You can renounce your other citizenship if you dont wish to have the rights and obligations of a citizen in your other country. If you dont, you shouldn’t be surprised when you get treated like a citizen in that country. Why would you deserve exemption from such responsibilities when you are using it to derive the benefits of citizenship? Renounce or stfu.
When being sworn in as a citizen a few years ago, the new citizen had to renounce his/her former citizenship and then swear allegiance to the USA.
That must have changed to accommodate dual citizenship. I wonder what else has changed??