[landemva]

Despite neocon politicians visiting Ukraine over past decade (McCain Pence Nuland others), that country is not in NATO. In 1994 Ukraine was disarmed of Soviet nukes and was specifically set up as buffer between western Europe and Russia as part of that agreement. Since then NATO kept pushing east.

Consider what USA would do if China was arming Canada or Mexico and visiting those countries encouraging attacks on USA. As an actual example, consider the panic and fear in USA when Soviet missiles appeared in Cuba.

I'm disgusted by the wasted treasure of USA meddling in eastern Europe. Spend the funds at home.

We could encourage Zelensky to abide by 2016 Minsk agreement to allow Donbas to vote on it's own future direction. Democracy good, right? Let them vote, as was agreed.

[somewhat_drunk]

Russia invaded an ally whom we promised to protect, who is also rich in natural resources, and is a strategic chokepoint for a future Russian invasion of Europe proper.

Ukraine had problems with corruption, but they were trending in the right direction, and their democracy was working. Russia, on the other hand, has a long history of murdering political dissidents and journalists, and their democracy was a sham. Ukraine was clearly ideologically aligned with western interests; Russia was clearly not.

I'm wholly in favor of inducting Ukraine into NATO once this is over and helping them rebuild. Russia can get fucked.

China is watching. We fail to honor our promise to Ukraine at Taiwan's peril. Appearing weak on our promises to allies invites World War.

Finally, $75 billion is an absolute bargain to effectively destroy one of our longest-standing enemies.

Defending Ukraine was correct morally, ethically, ideologically, and strategically. It boggles my mind that right wingers argue against it with a straight face.

You are spreading Russian propaganda. Stop doing that.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/exposing-the-myth-...

[landemva]

> Russia invaded an ally whom we promised to protect

Lindsey Graham and John McCain and Hunter Biden had interests there, but Ukraine is not in NATO and was set up in 1994 to not ally with either side. USA has no actual defense agreement there yet is now running a proxy war against Russia.

If that is good for USA, then let Congress debate it and declare war. Russia is not my enemy, despite the propaganda.

[somewhat_drunk]

Ukraine is not in NATO, but they are absolutely an ally. Why would you allow Russia to invade a potential member of NATO as well as an ally as well as someone who you persuaded to give up their nukes in exchange for a promise to defend them in just this circumstance is beyond me.

We had every reason to defend Ukraine, and very few to abstain from doing so. That we also got Russia's collapse for a pittance in the bargain is just icing on the cake.

You have drank the koolaid, and are likely still doing so. Stop doing that.

[_kbh_]

> We could encourage Zelensky to abide by 2016 Minsk agreement to allow Donbas to vote on it's own future direction. Democracy good, right? Let them vote, as was agreed.

Why don't we encourage Russia to abide by the 1994 agreement where they gave assurances to Ukraine they would never invade and never threaten sovereignty?.

I am interested in why everyone is so keen and insistent that Ukraine abide by the 2016 Minsk agreement, but Russia is free to violate any or all agreements they have with Ukraine.

I think what Russias flagrant breaking of the multiple treaties and agreements they have with Ukraine has shown us is that Russia is not interested in abiding by international agreements when it doesn't interest them.

So my question is then, why would Minsk be any different?, the answer its not, Russia will break it the moment it benefits them, they have in fact already broken the Minsk agreements multiple times.

The only thing that will stop Russia is military force, they need to be physically stopped before they will start caring.

[landemva]

Minsk is mainly Russian speakers. NY Times reported Zelensky tried to outlaw their religion. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/02/world/europe/zelensky-ukr...

Merkel indicated the West 2016 Minsk agreement was never going to upheld and was to buy time to arm Ukraine. Now who would trust the West?

https://ho1.us/2022/12/ukraine-war-merkels-confession-about-...

[_kbh_]

So do you or don't you think that Russia should be obligated to abide by its international agreements such as the Budapest Memorandum that it signed in 1994?.

If you don't think they should be obligated to follow there agreements then why should you expect Ukraine to follow any of theres?.

> Merkel indicated the West 2016 Minsk agreement was never going to upheld and was to buy time to arm Ukraine. Now who would trust the West? https://ho1.us/2022/12/ukraine-war-merkels-confession-about-...

If you're going to make claims like this please use credible sources. "ho1.us"?

[landemva]

Ok, big name websites with same quotes of Merkel saying Minsk agreement was only to buy time.

https://www.dw.com/en/angela-merkel-opens-up-on-ukraine-puti...

https://news.yahoo.com/putin-disappointed-merkels-words-mins...

"... ex-Chancellor Angela Merkel, where she claimed that the Minsk agreements of 2014 enabled Ukraine to prepare for the war with Russia."

The 2016 Minsk agreement included Donbas vote on their own self-sovereignty. Zelensky won't allow the vote, and is restricting religious practices there.

[_kbh_]

> The 2016 Minsk agreement included Donbas vote on their own self-sovereignty. Zelensky won't allow the vote, and is restricting religious practices there.

Minsk II failed to implement because the “separatists” (ie Russian soldiers outside uniform) did not obey the ceasefire and neither did some of the Ukrainian battalions.

We all know that Minsk II was never gonna last though.