• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How Donald Trump Is Making It Harder to End the War in Ukraine

Rogue Valley

Lead or get out of the way
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
93,583
Reaction score
81,660
Location
Barsoom
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
How Donald Trump Is Making It Harder to End the War in Ukraine

23638459-u-zelenskogo-rasskazali-v-kakom-sluchae.jpg

President Volodmyr Zelenskyy.

12/6/19
On Monday, in Paris, Volodymyr Zelensky and Vladimir Putin will meet, for the first time, for face-to-face peace talks on a five-year conflict in eastern Ukraine that has cost more than thirteen thousand lives (already transpired). Ending the war in the Donbass has been the primary policy goal for Zelensky since he took office last May. “I am focused on the Donbass, on ending this war,” he told me in Kyiv this summer, when I was reporting a profile of him for the magazine. Ukrainian voters had given him a “quota of trust,” as he put it, and it was time to bring the war to a close. Yet unlike on matters of, say, land-sale reform or anti-corruption legislation, that is not something that Zelensky, or any Ukrainian President, can will into being. Zelensky needs the acquiescence, or at least participation, of Putin, who provides the military firepower and diplomatic backing that props up the Donbas’s separatist enclaves. Making things even more complicated for Zelensky, and affecting both his and Putin’s calculations, are the impeachment hearings in Washington, where President Trump is accused of suborning U.S. policy toward Ukraine in the service of his own political bugbears. The hope in Kyiv was that Zelensky and Trump could meet as soon as possible, and that Zelensky could sell to Trump the idea of playing the “grand peacemaker” in Ukraine, Alyona Getmanchuk, the director of New Europe Center, a foreign-policy think-tank, told me. “Zelensky really hoped to get Trump involved, that the United States would take part in this process, and not just as an observer but an ally.” Trump would get the glory; and Ukraine, peace. This summer, I spoke to a Zelensky adviser for my profile, who seconded why the new Ukrainian President was so intent on arranging a visit to the White House: “It would be a signal to Russia, of course.”

But, as the impeachment hearings have shown, Trump has proved distrustful of Ukraine, viewing the country through the repeatedly disproven conspiracy theory that Ukraine, and not Russia, had tried to interfere in the 2016 U.S. election. To the extent that he cared about Ukraine at all, Trump paid more attention to the efforts of his lawyer Rudy Giuliani to dig up politically useful dirt on Joe Biden. Gordon Sondland, U.S. Ambassador to the E.U., relayed to a colleague of Ambassador Taylor at the Embassy in Kyiv that “Trump cares more about the investigations of Biden” than Ukraine itself. For most of the twenty-five years of Ukraine’s post-Soviet independence, it enjoyed consistent and bipartisan support in Washington—including, and most importantly, after 2014, when Russia annexed Crimea and sparked war in the Donbas. In the age of Trump, that has eroded. Zelensky, then, is left in a perilous situation: He faces Putin at a time when U.S. backing for Ukraine has suddenly turned wobbly, but he can’t risk alienating Trump or Republicans any further, lest Ukraine be thrown to the wolves entirely. He knows he will be dealing with Trump for at least another year, perhaps another five. Since the Ukraine-related scandal erupted, Zelensky has been restrained and deflecting in his comments, obviously—and understandably—uninterested in making himself any more of a player in the ongoing impeachment battle than he already has become. Earlier this month, in an interview with Time and three European outlets, Zelensky went the farthest he has gone in expressing his frustration and disappointment with Trump. “We’re at war. If you’re our strategic partner, then you can’t go blocking anything for us,” he said, referring to the three hundred and twenty million dollars in aid that Trump ordered frozen in July. “I think that’s just about fairness. It’s not about a quid pro quo. It just goes without saying.” Going into the Paris talks, Putin is pressuring Zelensky as much as he can: he is aware of his eagerness to end the war, that the United States is absent, and that European leaders are pushing Zelensky to make a deal.

One could easily argue that Donald Trump aided Vladimir Putin in a 'circuitous' fashion by temporarily withholding US Congressional defense funding for Ukraine, a nation at war with Putin's Russia.

Merely the impression of weak US presidential support strengthens Putin's position and weakens that of Zelenskyy. I believe Trump clearly understood this implication.
 
Ukraine's position is not enviable. They lack the military capability to push the Russians back and must accept de facto Russian control of Crimea and must make concessions on Donbass and Donetsk. Zelensky has been dealt a bad hand and has to make do with what he can.
 
Lets remember what President Obama did when Russia invaded Crimea?

He refused to send weapons in an aid package. And some how this is Trump's fault?
Only in the resist world!!


White House rebuffs Ukraine appeal for weapons
Sept 2014

WASHINGTON — The White House refused to include weapons in an aid package announced Thursday for embattled Ukraine despite an impassioned plea by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko for more military assistance.

White House rebuffs Ukraine appeal for weapons
 
Lets remember what President Obama did when Russia invaded Crimea?

He refused to send weapons in an aid package.

Because they would have ended up in Russian and/or Separatist hands.
 
How Donald Trump Is Making It Harder to End the War in Ukraine

23638459-u-zelenskogo-rasskazali-v-kakom-sluchae.jpg

President Volodmyr Zelenskyy.



One could easily argue that Donald Trump aided Vladimir Putin in a 'circuitous' fashion by temporarily withholding US Congressional defense funding for Ukraine, a nation at war with Putin's Russia.

Merely the impression of weak US presidential support strengthens Putin's position and weakens that of Zelenskyy. I believe Trump clearly understood this implication.

I wonder how intimidated Putin was by all those blankets being lobbed at his tanks?

The The Obama & European Clown Show is what emboldened Putin from the start.

"The Donald" isn't my choice for making things much better either
 
I wonder how intimidated Putin was by all those blankets being lobbed at his tanks?

If we had sent weapons to the Ukrainians in 2014 they would have ended up in Russian and Separatist hands.

Just like huge chunks of the Ukrainian arsenal did.
 
When did the corruption end?

It still hasn't, lol. Even the Javelins Trump sent them were earmarked with the condition that they weren't supposed to be used against Russian tanks.

The reality is there wasn't anything NATO could realistically do about the Russian invasion. It sucks, but it's the truth.
 
It still hasn't, lol. Even the Javelins Trump sent them were earmarked with the condition that they weren't supposed to be used against Russian tanks.

The reality is there wasn't anything NATO could realistically do about the Russian invasion. It sucks, but it's the truth.

And there is still no realistic way the US can stop them now....right?

I mean, short of going to war?
 
And there is still no realistic way the US can stop them now....right?

I mean, short of going to war?

The Obama Administration and the EU floated a military response back in 2014...and it was shut down after Moscow threatened nuclear retaliation if that happened.

So no. Ukraine's in a tough spot. They can't hope to win a war with Russia, and nobody is willing to sacrifice their capital cities over Donbass and Crimea. Zelensky has few options, and I think he's ultimately making the best choice he can.
 
The Obama Administration and the EU floated a military response back in 2014...and it was shut down after Moscow threatened nuclear retaliation if that happened.

So no. Ukraine's in a tough spot. They can't hope to win a war with Russia, and nobody is willing to sacrifice their capital cities over Donbass and Crimea. Zelensky has few options, and I think he's ultimately making the best choice he can.

The Ukraine isn't a Trump creation, although I don't expect he'll make anything better either.

If the EU is so concerned about the Ukraine, then let them handle Russia. Oh wait..... :shock:

The United States ends up getting the blame anyways when things go south.

Those earmarks regarding the Javelins is nothing but a......... wink wink.......and I think that you and I know this already.
 
The Ukraine isn't a Trump creation, although I don't expect he'll make anything better either.

Indeed, it is doubtful.

If the EU is so concerned about the Ukraine, then let them handle Russia.

And do what? Go to war with Russia?

Those earmarks regarding the Javelins is nothing but a......... wink wink.......and I think that you and I know this already.

American weapons being used to kill Russian troops and destroy Russian vehicles is an escalation.
 
Indeed, it is doubtful.



And do what? Go to war with Russia?



American weapons being used to kill Russian troops and destroy Russian vehicles is an escalation.

1. The javelins are a wink wink.

2. The Euro's will be full of criticism of the USA no matter what moves we make on the situation. It's their move if they are so very concerned about Russian expansion in
Europe. Why do the anti tank weapons have to come from the USA to begin with if Euro's are so concerned?
 
Why do the anti tank weapons have to come from the USA to begin with if Euro's are so concerned?

The US Congress insisted.

What the Trump administration doesn't say out loud, is that there are 'conditions' tied to the Javelin sales.

They must be stored in Western Ukraine, far from the eastern front. Basically useless if Russian mechanized/tank columns pour over the border. They are more of a psychological boost/deterrent.

The anti-tank weapon that Ukraine uses on the JFO is the Stugna-P, a portable laser-guided system and actually an excellent tank killer.

They also have the Ukraine made Item-115/210 anti-tank missiles mounted on BMP's and MBT's.

Truth be told, I have no idea why they order US Javelin's. They would be far better served buying ELINT/ECM/ECCM systems.
 
Lets remember what President Obama did when Russia invaded Crimea?

He refused to send weapons in an aid package. And some how this is Trump's fault?
Only in the resist world!!


White House rebuffs Ukraine appeal for weapons
Sept 2014

WASHINGTON — The White House refused to include weapons in an aid package announced Thursday for embattled Ukraine despite an impassioned plea by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko for more military assistance.

White House rebuffs Ukraine appeal for weapons

Supporting Ukraine against Trump's irrational ego driven fears does not require that anyone defend the equally short-sided and manipulative policies of the Obama administration. The Obama administration may have been driven by the usual left-wing antipathy to aggressive action against former communist or quasi-socialist regimes, but the result has been the same: sacrificing a potential ally and emerging democratic state to the hands of a KGB driven state by a former head of the KGB.

Trump may be, in the long run, the best thing that has happened to Ukraine IF ONLY because it has forced the spineless left of the Democratic party to retreat from its affection for a toothless Obama styled defense of the country and perhaps forced it to actually support serious Ukraine aide.

Bottom line is both Trump and Obama have been horribly wrong (even despicable) in their tepid defense of Ukraine. In confronting new styled fascism, one of them has the backbone of Chamberlin (or Kerry in the first Gulf war), and the other a fellow-traveling respect for a strong-man militarist nationalist.

Till such time as a President and Congress unreservedly supports Ukraine with more than a handful of anti-tank missiles (such as the latest in technology for field artillery, EW warfare, ground attack aircraft, and AA suppression) then all politicians who oppose this must be harshly condemned.

Show me a Charlie Wilson in either party, and only then will they get my respect.
 
Lets remember what President Obama did when Russia invaded Crimea?

He refused to send weapons in an aid package. And some how this is Trump's fault?
Only in the resist world!!


White House rebuffs Ukraine appeal for weapons
Sept 2014

WASHINGTON — The White House refused to include weapons in an aid package announced Thursday for embattled Ukraine despite an impassioned plea by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko for more military assistance.

White House rebuffs Ukraine appeal for weapons

This was right after Russian forces had crossed into the Donbass region, but before the full Russian invasion of eastern Ukraine. I do not recall what the thinking in NATO and in the Eastern European capitals was at the time.

You conveniently forgot that Obama imposed (and the Senate ratified) tough sanctions against Russia, which (along with low oil prices) have had a devastating impact on the Russian economy.

You also conveniently forget to mention that Trump promised the he would do away with those sanctions, which is how Michael Flynn wound up in hot water.
 
Till such time as a President and Congress unreservedly supports Ukraine with more than a handful of anti-tank missiles (such as the latest in technology for field artillery, EW warfare, ground attack aircraft, and AA suppression) then all politicians who oppose this must be harshly condemned.

How to waste billions of dollars worth of military hardware 101.
 
Crimea and eastern Ukraine were Obama's special gift to Putin. Somehow Trump is getting flak for his Ukraine policy but I don't see Putin making any more land grabs like that since Trump was elected. That's a positive right?
 
Crimea and eastern Ukraine were Obama's special gift to Putin.

What should the Obama Administration done in your mind? Go to war with Russia over Crimea?
 
What should the Obama Administration done in your mind? Go to war with Russia over Crimea?

Maybe. We promised Ukraine if they gave up their nukes we'd have their backs. Ukraine gave up their nukes and Putin marched in while Obama sat there with his dick in his hand.
 

That would have been incredibly stupid.

We promised Ukraine if they gave up their nukes we'd have their backs.

We wanted Ukraine to give up their nukes because

A) They didn't have the resources to take care of them

B) A poor country without proper nuclear protection protocols is just begging for a warhead to get lost on the black market.

C) They weren't even Ukrainian nukes to begin with; they were Soviet property that the Russians couldn't take care of.

D) Given the disintegration of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in 2014, the idea that they would have been able to successfully carry out a preemptive nuclear strike to halt the Russians is questionable at best.

Ukraine gave up their nukes and Putin marched in while Obama sat there with his dick in his hand.

So Crimea is worth starting a nuclear war over?
 
That would have been incredibly stupid.



We wanted Ukraine to give up their nukes because

A) They didn't have the resources to take care of them

B) A poor country without proper nuclear protection protocols is just begging for a warhead to get lost on the black market.

C) They weren't even Ukrainian nukes to begin with; they were Soviet property that the Russians couldn't take care of.

D) Given the disintegration of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in 2014, the idea that they would have been able to successfully carry out a preemptive nuclear strike to halt the Russians is questionable at best.



So Crimea is worth starting a nuclear war over?

No but it would be nice if people would quit calling Trump a Russian asset when it was Obama who bent the knee to Putin's let's say territorial aggressiveness. While many Democrat politicians and their kids were getting rich over there in Ukraine.
 
No but it would be nice if people would quit calling Trump a Russian asset when it was Obama who bent the knee to Putin's let's say territorial aggressiveness. While many Democrat politicians and their kids were getting rich over there in Ukraine.

So what exactly should the Obama Administration have done? Go to war with Russia?
 
So what exactly should the Obama Administration have done? Go to war with Russia?

What Obama should have done is have approved serious military aide to Ukraine upon the first rumblings over Crimea. Perhaps if he had done so the Donbass incursion by Russian forces might not have occurred.

Supplying Ukraine with blankets and first aid kits is a laughable response to Putin's Sudetenland styled annexations and invasions.
 
Back
Top Bottom