Yes, if you ignore everything that is contrary to the narrative, Trump was "tough" on Russia.
Trump did sign off on sanctioning Russia, but let's not pretend it was done with any authority, it was done after congress pressured him. He had no desire to upset his bff.
You are free to ignore Trump's praise of Putin as he imprisons the innocent and kills his critics and write it off as bluster, that's fine. I just can't figure out why - after 9 years of criticism - Trump can't seem to do anything that pull out the lube for Putin. He'll criticize our nation and leaders in an instant, but can't seem to bring himself to even superficially criticize a murderer.
You start pairing his comments with Putin with his comments on the leaders of China and NK, his paling around with Viktor Orban, and never denying the fact he wants to be a dictator.... well, we can all draw our own conclusions, I guess.
I could care less about what Trump says about Putin or any other dictator. What matters is how geopolitics are handled.
Virtue signaling condemnation to the world carries little practical benefit. A prime example of this is Biden speaking ill of MBS (rightfully so)… but when we actually needed Saudi Arabia’s oil post Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, MBS effectively told Biden to F-off.
I’d rather have our leaders act cordially with dictators and other criminal leaders we have no choice but to cooperate with than to alienate them to no benefit. I see no problem using flattery as an effective tool in forming and maintaining relationships with such leaders so long as the line is held when it comes to policy decisions that actually matter.
For example, I’d much rather have POTUS for example speak kindly to the Mullahs than give them billions of dollars.
If Trump is elected, then we shall see where his priorities lay between Russia and Ukraine. He should have to answer such questions but given he won’t participate in primary debates and it’s entirely possible he and Biden will not debate (either because Trump will refuse working with X network or Biden will claim he will not debate someone like Trump). Even then, I don’t trust Trump from pulling a 180 for or against Ukraine as soon as he’s in office.
I find the republicans withholding of Ukraine aid a truly disgusting act, especially since most have supported aid in the past. The result is costing countless lives and increasing the chances of NATO putting boots on the ground in the future. The moral and democratic imperatives aside, the Ukraine war has cost us nothing when compared to our defense budget, has tremendously degraded Russia’s current and longterm military capabilities (one of our biggest geopolitical foes), has stimulated our economy and replacement of aging military hardware- all while not having to sacrifice the life of a single US soldier. It’s hard not to see this war as beneficial to the US.
And if they truly believed the argument the war must end to save lives, which I don’t think is an unfair argument, the republicans would have promoted a peace deal at the outbreak of the war, or when Ukraine was on the offensive and in a optimal negotiating position, etc. And perhaps they would actually be working to promote a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine. Ultimately shouldn’t be Ukraine’s decision whether they fight or negotiate?
Pulling the rug on Ukraine seems no different than Biden effectively handing Afghanistan over to the Taliban. And there is no way this doesn’t hurt our world standing even more than it has been.
I don’t think the republicans want to end this war. I think they want to highlight domestic issues and juxtapose those problems with the money spent on Ukraine. I think they want the Europeans to recognize how underfunded their militaries are and how dependent they have been on the US for military aid- and to signal they need to pickup the slack. Along those lines, they’re forcing the Europeans to cough up their own military hardware. I think it’s also a bit of a power play over Ukraine and the other European countries.
I would not be surprised to see a second term of Trump dump unprecedented funding into Ukraine or force a negotiation based on the involvement of US/NATO troops. At the same time, I see it entirely possible he ends the war to Russia’s benefit just to say he ended the war.
I just have a hard time believing the right will allow Putin the optics of winning this war. Let alone the military and defense-industrial complex allowing this war to end on such terms.
Considering how much of the right’s opposition is based on obscuring facts like much of the “money” we’ve given them is the replacement value of military equipment already retired or slated for retirement- therefore the accounting is much more nuanced. It’s not like retiring this stuff doesn’t cost money either…. these complaints are not justified so it makes me wonder what their motives really are.
Personally, I won’t support any politician who is blocking aid to Ukraine or who wants to determine when Ukraine can no longer continue fighting.
Even if we assume Trump is secretly a Russian asset, following the 2016 MSNBC narrative, it doesn’t explain why the rest of the Republican Party would work in Russia’s favor. Pro-Russian ideology isn’t exactly a traditional right wing platform.
www.kyivpost.com
