Bill,
Please bear with me on my question: Why did we not supply Ukraine with long-range missiles 3+ years ago so they could have destroyed Saint Petersburg and Moscow, ending the war as Russian civilians and soldiers quit or assassinated Putin, and saving 1.600,000 lives and $950,000,000,000?
Thanks, John
-------------------
Good to hear from you, John. You've asked a complicated question in my opinion, and the answer may be just as complicated, or perhaps perplexing.
Firstly, the war between Russia and Ukraine has possibly ancient underpinnings--i.e., hatred among people groups that goes far back in history, probably almost to not long after the dissolution of the Roman Empire. But dwelling on ancient rivalries and hatreds won't end today's chaos--it just gives a sort of "setting" for it. Much of it revolves around subscribing to "conspiratorial versions of history", which for the most part are not provable historically beyond doubt and which often are fomented by people or organizations with "agendas". This is especially the case in the ancient intrigues and violence that occurred between Russians and Ukrainians (or their predecessors in history over a thousand years ago).
Further complicating the situation is the hatred that has existed between Russians and Ukrainians for over a century at least, for Ukraine was a sovereign entity for hundreds of years or more, until Russia under Stalin brutally annexed Ukraine during his dictatorship and did his best to decimate a large portion of the Ukrainian population during the 1930's (i.e. the KULAK purposeful starvation in Stalin's insane drive to collectivize the farmers of Russia). I'm writing late at night from memory without researching that time of history in detail, so if I'm off, I apologize.
Putin knows all of this history, of course, and so does "President" Zelinsky, who IMO is basically a little tin-pot dictator who has used "war" to assume dictatorial control of Ukraine, cancel all elections, (and wants to keep the war going, hoping that the WAR LORDS and WAR LOVERS of NATO (and this includes the Neo-Cons of the RINO Party in the U.S.) will continue to support him indefinitely, which is insane.
Frankly, the U.S. should NEVER have involved itself in any way in this conflict. This is a European concern; it is in their backyard, and should have been left up to the socialists and war lovers who run Europe to settle. I believe that the U.S. should never have become involved, even to the surreptitious extent that we presently are committed to, other than, perhaps, selling U.S. weaponry to Ukraine or to the NATO war lovers (frankly I don't even believe we should sell weaponry to belligerents but if we didn't, our all-powerful "military-industrial complex" would get very pissed off. Mustn't let that happen, of course.
Our Founders cautioned strongly against becoming intertwined with other nations, politically or militarily, and that was good advice. But of course we long ago abandoned listening to the common sense of those who founded our nation, and we have long ago abandoned sure and certain allegiance to the Constitution they codified for us, and have become the "world's policeman", arms supplier, cheer leaders for war, and experts in meddling in the affairs of other nations, being controlled for well over a century by the globalists and national & international banking fraternity who use war and intrigue to further their globalist agendas of world government.
We've paid a terribly high price for our "leadership", for our phony "nation building"--i.e., "regime change" mostly for the worst! (Destroying Iran under the SHAH and siding with the Russian commies to bring in the totally cuckoo and hate-filled Islamic DICTATORSHIP in 1979 is a case in point). We should surely NOT ever get involved in the wars of other nations unless we are directly attacked, and then ONLY after Congress issues a CONSTITUTIONAL DECLARATION OF WAR, something that hasn't been done since Dec. 8, 1941. (And that SHOULD have included President Trump's bombing of Iran recently).
Putin surely is to be condemned for destroying Ukrainian cities. It would be EQUALLY CONDEMNATORY if great, beautiful, and historic Russian cities like St. Petersburg (the Hermitage--one of the most beautiful buildings on earth-- and The Winter Palace-- would be lost--all of the history in Moscow might be sacrificed). Too high a price for civilization, such as it is today, to pay!
The Nazi barbarians did that back in WW11, and what was lost can never be resurrected. The only acceptable path to peace is Trump's way--NEGOTIATIONS, and give and take on both sides. Trump is right--the KILLING ON BOTH SIDES must stop now! If that requires relinquishing the Donbas region of Ukraine to Putin, then so be it. It's FULL of ethnic Russians anyway. The Ukrainian people will kick Zelinsky OUT of office if they get a chance, and good riddance. They want a negotiated peace, and they want it now.
So do I.
Many patriots are convinced that the territorial grabbing of some of Ukraine's land wasn't the only reason for Putin's attack. We know that Putin would love to "re-annex" some parts of Europe to reconstitute some part of the former U.S.S.R. That's unlikely to happen. We know he's against Ukraine being inducted into NATO, and rightly so IMO. Were I Russia's leader, I would not want the war-mongering NATO on my border either, for there have been more wars SINCE NATO (and SEATO for a short time) was founded in the late 1940s than at any other time in world history.
But we're pretty certain that Ukraine was harboring a number of secret bio-weapon facilities, some financed by the Commie Chinese beasts and some by U.S. government 3-letter agencies (CIA, NIH, etc--"Dr" Fauci knows). Perhaps Putin did the world a "favor" of sorts, because these bio facilities have been eliminated by Putin on purpose, I've heard.
Anyway, that's how I see things, rightly or not.
