We are funding Ukraine's War but Ukraine has net declared what their war goals are. Do they want to force Russis out of all east Ukraine and the Crimea? The fighting will never stop then until the last Ukranian is dead and every building is rubble. Is that a useful goal to fight for? The Russians have reasons important to them too that they will fight for but do they both need complete victories? We should be influencing the Ukraine to be realistic and declare what victory looks like to them so that cease fire negotiations can be considered by the Russians who have a big disappointment on their hands with their invasion. They are probably looking for a way to get out with some achievements to justify the war to their people.
I was a child of the Cold War. My father was stationed for a total of six years in Europe. I saw the Berlin Wall. The Soviets turned entire countries into prisons, complete with armed guards who were ordered to shoot people attempting to escape. Evil governments are far too real.
Russian culture was centered in Kiev before the rise of the Muscovite princes. The Soviet Union destroyed that kinship in the Holodomor. From the Ukrainian point of view there was very little to choose between the Soviets and the Nazis.
Now Putin is trying to hide his failures behind a rebuilt Russian Empire.
It is a given that US foreign policy screwed up. Somebody said that Americans will always do the right thing, after exhausting every alternative. What is the right thing now? It can’t be a simple choice between global thermonuclear war and leaving the Ukrainians hanging out to dry.
This is ridiculous. Ukraine is a sovereign nation with its own culture and language, recognized by the UN and given security assurances by the US in return for giving up their nuclear arsenal. If America doesn’t defend Ukraine it might as well scrap foreign policy altogether and go full isolationism.
I was an anti-war protester for 30 years. I was younger. I don’t know enough about the Russia-Ukraine war to advise intelligently. But, we can be certain that China and other colonialist countries are watching our response. If we show commitment to defending sovereignty, then countries who want to overrun their neighbors- would think twice. Think of it as a strategic investment in global stability.
Ukraine Question? (Cont.) In his book, " Presumed Alliance: The Unspoken Conflict Between Blacks and Latinos and What It Means for America, the author, Nicolas C. Vaca, disdained a rainbow coalition and presumed alliance with Black Americans...they wanted to compete with Blacks for political and economic power...they felt that by the mere fact that they were more socially acceptable than Blacks in American society...they could gain socioeconomic benefits and become the nation's majority-minority population. Their goal, according to Vaca, was to displace Blacks in every way possible."
When will "crack head" Hunter Biden be charged for his crimes? His dad, Jim Crow Joe Biden, was the architect of the 1994 racist crime bill which put Black mass incarceration on steroids.
Jim Crow Joe Biden stated on the Breakfast Club, "you're not Black if you don't vote for me." Blacks did vote for Jim Crow. After a post election meeting with Civil Rights leaders in Atlanta, he said that Hispanics are now the largest minority group, and that Whites need to pay more attention to them. He related blacks needed to get along better with Hispanics.
The culture War is heating up more. Louisiana wants to ban the study of racism in colleges and universities. One third of Louisiana is Black with one of the most savage histories of Jim Crow and White terrorism.
My thoughts on Ukraine? Europeans have killed each other by the multiple millions through endless wars. And millions more through genocide of indigenous people throughout the world in the pursuit of wealth and power (happiness).
Europeans appropriated gun powder and navigation technology from the Chinese, and went on a rampage around the world. Now, the chickens are coming home to roost (China). Lol!!!!
Putin hankers to be remembered as Russia's Czar for his era, ignoring the fact that the Czarist model is obsolete. Like Trump, he is a prisoner of his outsized ego. Especially given that he has groomed no successor (or we would have heard about it), when he expires. His style of ruler is likely to collapse of its own weight. Xi has structured Chinese government so as to insulate himself for a lifetime of ruling, but if he dropped dead tomorrow, would China's structure remain as is? Unlikely. Is he revered or feared?
Putin is feared. But in bent, Russia is no China, though both being Communist, both are iron fist governments. If China falters economically, how long could Xi remain in charge? In Russia, already the people seem cocked and ready to insist on a new deal if Putin disappears.
Putin's game plan is to ooze ever outward, absorbing weak satellites already in Russia's orbit. Ukraine's borders and sentiments marked and mark the dividing line for easy conquest by Russia, by oozing, or at gunpoint. Which is why Finland & Norway want NATO membership: They felt vulnerable, and next in line if Ukraine succumbs. It is authoritarianism vs. democracy. If Putin can't be stopped by Ukraine, at what border can they be stopped? Ukraine is Democracy's moment of truth and point of pushback. Ukraine is the West's proxy, confronting Putin; which is turning out to be Putin's Waterloo. As realpolitik would have it, Ukraine is either the West's victor, or it collapses and we ourselves must fill the breach with the lives of our own military; which could mushroom unpredictably.
Yes, Russia has nuclear weapons. But Russia also knows that to use them would end life on Earth as we know it. As Chernobyl showed, no nation, including Russia, would escape the radioactive fallout. We all die. So nuclear weaponry appears to be good for one thing only: A bluffing chip; an option to be feared, though to use it dooms user and victim alike; a mutual suicide option. Even Putin knows it. Would he exercise suicide just to try to show the world who's boss? Besides, as the Ukraine conflict is working out, Russia is not the conventional threat it boasted it was.
So if we value democracy, we must back Ukraine as our proxy, like it or not. "There but for the grace of God go we." So keep the weaponry flowing to Ukraine. Keep bolstering Ukraine. If not them, us.
When Hitler threatened world peace, we demurred, and got worse for our isolationist foolhardiness: 6 years of war & casualties for our asininity. In the end, we had to go whole hog. So far, Ukraine is our buffer. We owe them all the support they need. Strategically, it is our best option. Spending dollars beats spending lives. If what we see happening today is upsetting, worse would be our direct confrontation with Putin's Russia, opening a Pandora's Box of consequences nastier than those we now are part of, from afar, backing Ukraine. As was famously said, "The price of liberty is eternal vigilance." And a willingness to sacrifice as needed. Realpolitik is realpolitik.
England's Neville Chamberlain learned that the hard way: In 1939 he proudly waved the peace agreement Hitler signed, proclaiming "Peace in our time." Before the ink was dry, Hitler's blitzkrieg had conquered Poland, instantly making the peace agreement worthless. WWII was on. Again: realpolitik. Only by confronting aggressors can aggression be neutralized.
Isolationist America tolerated Japan's invasion of Manchuria and China in the 1930's. A short few years later, we learned how foolhardy our isolationism was, when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, and drove us out of the Philippines, Corregidor and Bataan. We have not been isolationist since. The risks are too great.
First, I really like it when Glenn steps out of the "Race War" debate and takes the time to dig into other really important stuff.
On the Ukraine and Taiwan issues, Yan Shen and Bessner make reasonable well thought out arguments. I'm sure there are lots of experts out there who can and want to contribute to the discussion. These are really complex and important matters that need careful policy consideration by the top levels of our Government. The problem is that the staffs that put together the source material for the policy proposers know the biases of their bosses and tend to color their conclusions/recommendations in a way that curries the most favor. By the time a significant policy recommendation works its way up to the decision maker (The President on matters like this) it's lost nuance and been shaped to get the answer that the entrenched bureaucracy wants. Then we rely on mental midgets like Joe Biden or Donald Trump to decide what to do. Ah the disadvantages of a large out of control administrative State present themselves. Well Hayek told us this is what would happen.
As for my own opinion on continuing to fund the war in Ukraine, if my only two choices are to use the money in Ukraine or use the money on to fund ineffective poorly implemented social programs back home, I say let's send it to Ukraine and hope for the best.
I think that Glenn Bessner has lost the plot on Ukraine. We are not in Ukraine to defend Ukraine. We are in Ukraine to defend Europe (via NATO) which is of unquestionable, very large, economic and geopolitical importance to the United States. Putting a bone in Putin's throat is just a way to do this. It helps this goal that the Ukrainians are so brave and determined to defend their homeland. Let's not throw away an advantage. And national honor should mean something.
The United States is a very rich country of 330 million in a world of 8 billion. If we want to keep our prosperity, we had better be very well-armed. It is worth it to us, out of cold, hard self-interest, to make and keep alliances with other rich democracies, and our trading currency for that is our military strength. I don't personally believe that the Chinese are coming to invade California, but we do need to fortify our positions on the premise that, like any nation (including the United States), China is self-interested and will use military force to achieve their goals if they can get away with it. Indeed, they are already doing this.
As for the military-industrial complex: the left could have contributed something towards reform of this problem in the half-century that they've been complaining about it, but have done nothing worthwhile because they have been caught up in the fantasy of defunding it. Most ordinary Americans don't share their very apparent distaste for the military and military people (many have relatives in what they call "the service") and they understand that, and why, the United States needs to be well-armed. I think they have a better read on the situation than the supposedly smarter and more sophisticated people who are trying to undermine that.
By all means, let's keep arming Ukrainian. Let's fight this proxy war to the last Ukrainian. It's not enough that we have already sacrificed a generation of Ukrainian men; there must be more that we can throw into the furnace of battle for the sake of a battle we helped to engineer. No one likes to hear the part about our complicity in what began last year. No one likes to admit that the US grossly reneged on its pledge of not expanding NATO eastward after the Berlin Wall fell. Instead, we tell ourselves that this is a battle to support democracy, because what democracy does not shut down media outlets, ban opposition parties, and put priests in jail?
This thing should have ended long ago but we couldn't have that. Instead, Boris Johnson was sent out to squash an apparent agreement between Zelensky and Putin. We have sent money and materiel to Ukraine to the point where our own military is practically defenestrated. Tough to fight China when you have little ammunition. Tough to fight China when military recruiting has taken a big hit. Tough to fight China when our one-time allies are increasingly seeing Xi as the better option over Biden.
All that aside, what is the goal there? Has anyone bothered to identify what 'victory' looks like? Other than talking about "save democracy," which is untrue given Ukrainian's rampant corruption, and "so Putin won't invade Europe," for which there is no evidence. As it is, we have expanded NATO to Russia's borders; "not one inch eastward" has become many inches. Were Putin to do what so many accuse him of wanting to do, he would be waging war against a NATO nation, which would oblige the rest of the alliance to join in. It's as if some of you want war, just war that will be fought thousands of miles away, killing other people, and destroying other countries, while we once more have the luxury of not seeing combat on US soil.
Except in 2023, war does not rely exclusively on bullets and tanks; it can be conducted electronically. Imagine an EMP detonating over the heartland. Imagine all the keyboard warriors suddenly having no access to their iPhones and tablets. Imagine the laptop class paralyzed in its home offices. How many Americans would survive the first month after learning that food is really not produced in grocery stores, that abundant fossil fuel energy is a requirement for the lifestyles we take for granted, and that all those personally-owned firearms some people hate might come in handy after all when the rampaging mobs visit their homes.
End the war. End it now. End it before the people who are bent on "fundamentally transforming" the US achieve their goal. Unless you prefer living in a country that is less free, less prosperous, and less consequential, which seems to have appeal to far more people than I might have once imagined.
I wish I was part of this interview. There is a lot oof missing history so far. In 1946, Truman, Marshall, Eisenhower, and Morganthall wanted to bring our troops home. Stalin could have gone to the English Channel if they had. Western Europe was in no condition to defend itself. In the early 60s there were 500,000 American troops in Europe not counting dependents. Can you imagine the cost? Europe is in a position to defend itself not but they won't fund the expense. That upsets the Amrrican public for good reason. Our defense as a percentage of GDP has declined to 5% down from 50% in 1956. The DOD budget should not be measured in absolute terms but in relative terms to be accurate. It has not kept up with inflation and we have the smallest force of troops since WWII. Regarding the Ukraine: it has been part of Russia since the 13th century ot 17th depending on the history you read, and the Crimea since the time of Katrrine the Great in the 1700s. Ukraine has been an independent country since 1991. No wonder Russia is upset, especially about the Crimea where it has large military bases. Is it any different than the problem Lincoln had when the Confederacy wanted to be separate from the Union in 1861? We should force the Ukraine to concede the Crimea and enough access to Crimea for Russia to defend it otherwise the fighting will go on forever.
The US is still the global hegemon, and last year the weaknesses of China and Russia were exposed.
We are funding Ukraine's War but Ukraine has net declared what their war goals are. Do they want to force Russis out of all east Ukraine and the Crimea? The fighting will never stop then until the last Ukranian is dead and every building is rubble. Is that a useful goal to fight for? The Russians have reasons important to them too that they will fight for but do they both need complete victories? We should be influencing the Ukraine to be realistic and declare what victory looks like to them so that cease fire negotiations can be considered by the Russians who have a big disappointment on their hands with their invasion. They are probably looking for a way to get out with some achievements to justify the war to their people.
I was a child of the Cold War. My father was stationed for a total of six years in Europe. I saw the Berlin Wall. The Soviets turned entire countries into prisons, complete with armed guards who were ordered to shoot people attempting to escape. Evil governments are far too real.
Russian culture was centered in Kiev before the rise of the Muscovite princes. The Soviet Union destroyed that kinship in the Holodomor. From the Ukrainian point of view there was very little to choose between the Soviets and the Nazis.
Now Putin is trying to hide his failures behind a rebuilt Russian Empire.
It is a given that US foreign policy screwed up. Somebody said that Americans will always do the right thing, after exhausting every alternative. What is the right thing now? It can’t be a simple choice between global thermonuclear war and leaving the Ukrainians hanging out to dry.
This is ridiculous. Ukraine is a sovereign nation with its own culture and language, recognized by the UN and given security assurances by the US in return for giving up their nuclear arsenal. If America doesn’t defend Ukraine it might as well scrap foreign policy altogether and go full isolationism.
I was an anti-war protester for 30 years. I was younger. I don’t know enough about the Russia-Ukraine war to advise intelligently. But, we can be certain that China and other colonialist countries are watching our response. If we show commitment to defending sovereignty, then countries who want to overrun their neighbors- would think twice. Think of it as a strategic investment in global stability.
Ukraine Question? (Cont.) In his book, " Presumed Alliance: The Unspoken Conflict Between Blacks and Latinos and What It Means for America, the author, Nicolas C. Vaca, disdained a rainbow coalition and presumed alliance with Black Americans...they wanted to compete with Blacks for political and economic power...they felt that by the mere fact that they were more socially acceptable than Blacks in American society...they could gain socioeconomic benefits and become the nation's majority-minority population. Their goal, according to Vaca, was to displace Blacks in every way possible."
When will "crack head" Hunter Biden be charged for his crimes? His dad, Jim Crow Joe Biden, was the architect of the 1994 racist crime bill which put Black mass incarceration on steroids.
Jim Crow Joe Biden stated on the Breakfast Club, "you're not Black if you don't vote for me." Blacks did vote for Jim Crow. After a post election meeting with Civil Rights leaders in Atlanta, he said that Hispanics are now the largest minority group, and that Whites need to pay more attention to them. He related blacks needed to get along better with Hispanics.
The Ukraine question? Lol!!!!
The culture War is heating up more. Louisiana wants to ban the study of racism in colleges and universities. One third of Louisiana is Black with one of the most savage histories of Jim Crow and White terrorism.
My thoughts on Ukraine? Europeans have killed each other by the multiple millions through endless wars. And millions more through genocide of indigenous people throughout the world in the pursuit of wealth and power (happiness).
Europeans appropriated gun powder and navigation technology from the Chinese, and went on a rampage around the world. Now, the chickens are coming home to roost (China). Lol!!!!
Bessner is a smart guy but glib to a fault.
To those who question our support of Ukraine:
Putin hankers to be remembered as Russia's Czar for his era, ignoring the fact that the Czarist model is obsolete. Like Trump, he is a prisoner of his outsized ego. Especially given that he has groomed no successor (or we would have heard about it), when he expires. His style of ruler is likely to collapse of its own weight. Xi has structured Chinese government so as to insulate himself for a lifetime of ruling, but if he dropped dead tomorrow, would China's structure remain as is? Unlikely. Is he revered or feared?
Putin is feared. But in bent, Russia is no China, though both being Communist, both are iron fist governments. If China falters economically, how long could Xi remain in charge? In Russia, already the people seem cocked and ready to insist on a new deal if Putin disappears.
Putin's game plan is to ooze ever outward, absorbing weak satellites already in Russia's orbit. Ukraine's borders and sentiments marked and mark the dividing line for easy conquest by Russia, by oozing, or at gunpoint. Which is why Finland & Norway want NATO membership: They felt vulnerable, and next in line if Ukraine succumbs. It is authoritarianism vs. democracy. If Putin can't be stopped by Ukraine, at what border can they be stopped? Ukraine is Democracy's moment of truth and point of pushback. Ukraine is the West's proxy, confronting Putin; which is turning out to be Putin's Waterloo. As realpolitik would have it, Ukraine is either the West's victor, or it collapses and we ourselves must fill the breach with the lives of our own military; which could mushroom unpredictably.
Yes, Russia has nuclear weapons. But Russia also knows that to use them would end life on Earth as we know it. As Chernobyl showed, no nation, including Russia, would escape the radioactive fallout. We all die. So nuclear weaponry appears to be good for one thing only: A bluffing chip; an option to be feared, though to use it dooms user and victim alike; a mutual suicide option. Even Putin knows it. Would he exercise suicide just to try to show the world who's boss? Besides, as the Ukraine conflict is working out, Russia is not the conventional threat it boasted it was.
So if we value democracy, we must back Ukraine as our proxy, like it or not. "There but for the grace of God go we." So keep the weaponry flowing to Ukraine. Keep bolstering Ukraine. If not them, us.
When Hitler threatened world peace, we demurred, and got worse for our isolationist foolhardiness: 6 years of war & casualties for our asininity. In the end, we had to go whole hog. So far, Ukraine is our buffer. We owe them all the support they need. Strategically, it is our best option. Spending dollars beats spending lives. If what we see happening today is upsetting, worse would be our direct confrontation with Putin's Russia, opening a Pandora's Box of consequences nastier than those we now are part of, from afar, backing Ukraine. As was famously said, "The price of liberty is eternal vigilance." And a willingness to sacrifice as needed. Realpolitik is realpolitik.
England's Neville Chamberlain learned that the hard way: In 1939 he proudly waved the peace agreement Hitler signed, proclaiming "Peace in our time." Before the ink was dry, Hitler's blitzkrieg had conquered Poland, instantly making the peace agreement worthless. WWII was on. Again: realpolitik. Only by confronting aggressors can aggression be neutralized.
Isolationist America tolerated Japan's invasion of Manchuria and China in the 1930's. A short few years later, we learned how foolhardy our isolationism was, when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, and drove us out of the Philippines, Corregidor and Bataan. We have not been isolationist since. The risks are too great.
First, I really like it when Glenn steps out of the "Race War" debate and takes the time to dig into other really important stuff.
On the Ukraine and Taiwan issues, Yan Shen and Bessner make reasonable well thought out arguments. I'm sure there are lots of experts out there who can and want to contribute to the discussion. These are really complex and important matters that need careful policy consideration by the top levels of our Government. The problem is that the staffs that put together the source material for the policy proposers know the biases of their bosses and tend to color their conclusions/recommendations in a way that curries the most favor. By the time a significant policy recommendation works its way up to the decision maker (The President on matters like this) it's lost nuance and been shaped to get the answer that the entrenched bureaucracy wants. Then we rely on mental midgets like Joe Biden or Donald Trump to decide what to do. Ah the disadvantages of a large out of control administrative State present themselves. Well Hayek told us this is what would happen.
As for my own opinion on continuing to fund the war in Ukraine, if my only two choices are to use the money in Ukraine or use the money on to fund ineffective poorly implemented social programs back home, I say let's send it to Ukraine and hope for the best.
I think that Glenn Bessner has lost the plot on Ukraine. We are not in Ukraine to defend Ukraine. We are in Ukraine to defend Europe (via NATO) which is of unquestionable, very large, economic and geopolitical importance to the United States. Putting a bone in Putin's throat is just a way to do this. It helps this goal that the Ukrainians are so brave and determined to defend their homeland. Let's not throw away an advantage. And national honor should mean something.
The United States is a very rich country of 330 million in a world of 8 billion. If we want to keep our prosperity, we had better be very well-armed. It is worth it to us, out of cold, hard self-interest, to make and keep alliances with other rich democracies, and our trading currency for that is our military strength. I don't personally believe that the Chinese are coming to invade California, but we do need to fortify our positions on the premise that, like any nation (including the United States), China is self-interested and will use military force to achieve their goals if they can get away with it. Indeed, they are already doing this.
As for the military-industrial complex: the left could have contributed something towards reform of this problem in the half-century that they've been complaining about it, but have done nothing worthwhile because they have been caught up in the fantasy of defunding it. Most ordinary Americans don't share their very apparent distaste for the military and military people (many have relatives in what they call "the service") and they understand that, and why, the United States needs to be well-armed. I think they have a better read on the situation than the supposedly smarter and more sophisticated people who are trying to undermine that.
By all means, let's keep arming Ukrainian. Let's fight this proxy war to the last Ukrainian. It's not enough that we have already sacrificed a generation of Ukrainian men; there must be more that we can throw into the furnace of battle for the sake of a battle we helped to engineer. No one likes to hear the part about our complicity in what began last year. No one likes to admit that the US grossly reneged on its pledge of not expanding NATO eastward after the Berlin Wall fell. Instead, we tell ourselves that this is a battle to support democracy, because what democracy does not shut down media outlets, ban opposition parties, and put priests in jail?
This thing should have ended long ago but we couldn't have that. Instead, Boris Johnson was sent out to squash an apparent agreement between Zelensky and Putin. We have sent money and materiel to Ukraine to the point where our own military is practically defenestrated. Tough to fight China when you have little ammunition. Tough to fight China when military recruiting has taken a big hit. Tough to fight China when our one-time allies are increasingly seeing Xi as the better option over Biden.
All that aside, what is the goal there? Has anyone bothered to identify what 'victory' looks like? Other than talking about "save democracy," which is untrue given Ukrainian's rampant corruption, and "so Putin won't invade Europe," for which there is no evidence. As it is, we have expanded NATO to Russia's borders; "not one inch eastward" has become many inches. Were Putin to do what so many accuse him of wanting to do, he would be waging war against a NATO nation, which would oblige the rest of the alliance to join in. It's as if some of you want war, just war that will be fought thousands of miles away, killing other people, and destroying other countries, while we once more have the luxury of not seeing combat on US soil.
Except in 2023, war does not rely exclusively on bullets and tanks; it can be conducted electronically. Imagine an EMP detonating over the heartland. Imagine all the keyboard warriors suddenly having no access to their iPhones and tablets. Imagine the laptop class paralyzed in its home offices. How many Americans would survive the first month after learning that food is really not produced in grocery stores, that abundant fossil fuel energy is a requirement for the lifestyles we take for granted, and that all those personally-owned firearms some people hate might come in handy after all when the rampaging mobs visit their homes.
End the war. End it now. End it before the people who are bent on "fundamentally transforming" the US achieve their goal. Unless you prefer living in a country that is less free, less prosperous, and less consequential, which seems to have appeal to far more people than I might have once imagined.
I wish I was part of this interview. There is a lot oof missing history so far. In 1946, Truman, Marshall, Eisenhower, and Morganthall wanted to bring our troops home. Stalin could have gone to the English Channel if they had. Western Europe was in no condition to defend itself. In the early 60s there were 500,000 American troops in Europe not counting dependents. Can you imagine the cost? Europe is in a position to defend itself not but they won't fund the expense. That upsets the Amrrican public for good reason. Our defense as a percentage of GDP has declined to 5% down from 50% in 1956. The DOD budget should not be measured in absolute terms but in relative terms to be accurate. It has not kept up with inflation and we have the smallest force of troops since WWII. Regarding the Ukraine: it has been part of Russia since the 13th century ot 17th depending on the history you read, and the Crimea since the time of Katrrine the Great in the 1700s. Ukraine has been an independent country since 1991. No wonder Russia is upset, especially about the Crimea where it has large military bases. Is it any different than the problem Lincoln had when the Confederacy wanted to be separate from the Union in 1861? We should force the Ukraine to concede the Crimea and enough access to Crimea for Russia to defend it otherwise the fighting will go on forever.
Paul Kennedy
Q.E.D.
I just heard Uganda is willing to help to Putin. Lol!!!!