9 Comments
Sep 11Liked by Two Grumpy Old Men on Ukraine

Thank-you gentlemen for the interesting discussion.

I agree Biden has had to walk a fine line. To be all things perfect, he’s had to appease US isolationists and tip-toe around the fear of nuclear escalation, all while understanding that a weak response to Putin’s expansionist obsession would assure the destruction of Eastern Europe at the very least, plus make us look weak to Beijing.

I’m frustrated that we allowed putin to be the puppet-master for so long at the beginning. I believe we should have struck hard during Prigozhin’s mutiny when Vlad was weak, and ended things right there.

I disagree with trump that he could strong arm putin and his hawks into any kind of US lead “peace”. Putin has never respected a contract in his life.

Expand full comment
author

Glad you liked it. Agree with your points....

Expand full comment
Sep 12·edited Sep 12

Another thought: when Biden and allies worked together for that incredible hostage/prisoner swap, we know who was included - Evan Gershkovich, the very one whose release Trump claimed only HE had the power to broker, because of his chummy and exclusive friendship with Putin. Well so much for that. I’ve never seen a more insulting slap in the face (and warning) to Trump by Putin. A sly message not to get too comfy. I wonder if Trump (or his sycophants) even recognized this for what it was. Edit: I wonder how DJT would’ve reacted if Harris had confronted him with that while he was bragging about how he “knew Putin very well”.

Expand full comment
Sep 12·edited Sep 12Liked by Two Grumpy Old Men on Ukraine

Thanks very much for sharing this link with me. Some quick points from my POV. Trump is realistically in no position to end the war on any kind of locus that respects either Ukraine’s or the EU’s point of view. In some ways, neither is Harris. But Harris could, and would, weigh in far more objectively on Ukraine, NATO and Europe than Trump. There are now other actors like China that complicate the issue. Trump, more than Harris, is unlikely to be heard in any real way in Beijing except on terms that somewhat favor China long-term. Xi sees Trump as a softer proposition than Biden. Trump will then have to compromise with China as well, and that won’t augur well for either the US or Europe long-term. Note, there is a dangerous flashpoint in the Indo-Pacific that extends all the way from the South China Sea to the Sea of Japan. This complicates the scenario for any US President. Trump has no sense of either history or diplomacy and seeks easy transactional wins driven by image and rhetoric—all short-term. A Trump-style intervention won’t end well for Ukraine, the EU or the world.

Expand full comment
author

You're making some good points, thanks

Expand full comment

Well, right now Russia is getting ready for a gigantic air, sea, and land exercise, and is surrounding the whole Scandinavian peninsula with warships. The joint exercise w China is going to include the Arctic, Pacific region, Crimea, and Eastern Sea (for English, check Barents observer.com). So when Harris says Putin ain't stoppin', he ain't... Just saying...

Expand full comment

Blaming Biden is easy to do. I'm proud the Americans have contributed, rightly so, to enable the Ukraine people to defend themselves. The purse strings are controlled by Congress, Ukraine doesn't have the support of half of them. Many, many Americans believe Ukraine is fighting our war. Putin will not stop there. I hope you are not thinking Donald Trump is mentally capable of helping Ukraine, he's very easily swayed by others. We're trying to return to a less hateful government. I'm thankful for President Biden leadership.

Expand full comment
author

....I agree, more or less, and I can assure you that none of us behind this blog believe that Trump would be better than Trump for Ukraine, or even close. That doesn't mean, though, that Biden couldn't have been faster, more decisive...

Expand full comment

I think the question to President Trump “Do you want Ukraine to win the war?” is an uninformed question. The United States and countries around the world have given billions of dollars to Ukraine and we have no idea what winning looks like.

President Trump’s response, that we want to end the war, was appropriate under the circumstances. When you negotiate an end to war, you have to consider all sides otherwise you’re just postponing the war.

Do you think Europe and the United States wants to obliterate Russia? Because that might be what Ukraine winning looks like. I don’t think so.

If you know, please tell me what does winning mean to Ukraine? Because I haven’t heard the United States tell us, the citizens of the United States, what that looks like.

Harris is incompetent and lacks knowledge to do this job. I was embarrassed by her when she went to Europe and shook her finger and said Ukraine will join NATO, when nobody believed that Ukraine was going to join NATO, at this time. Her purpose for being there was to poke the bear.

She keeps talking about a two states solution for Israel and Palestine, but neither party wants a two solution. If this is forced on the two countries, it only postponed the war.

These are complicated issues, to try to sum it up with a single question. “Do you want Ukraine to win the war?” is an extraordinarily uninformed question as far as I’m concerned. 😟

Expand full comment