Meatball Ron is a Putin bootlicker

[インターネット掲示板ユーザー Punxsutawney Phil]

Lol, Reagan hated communism, not Russia. He'd probably be close to DeSantis' position if still alive.

Not a Reagan fan but in what world would he let such a destabilizing event in Europe like this go unaddressed. Especially when HW Bush whose administration was all Reagan left overs cranked down so hard on Saddam invading Kuwait

Kuwait has the oil, more than Iraq per capita, Bush was a known oil guy.

Ukraine doesn't disproportionately per capita hold more oil than Russia.

Big difference.

Ukraine is the world’s breadbasket so to act like it holds no value to the US for more cynical economic reasons would be disingenuous

Ukraine is the world's 8th-largest wheat producer, so it's a bit of an exaggeration to call it the "world's breadbasket". Russia, the largest wheat exporter in the world, has a far better claim to that title.

There is a breadbasket running from Kazakhstan to Ukraine. Ukraine has part of that breadbasket, but it's a smaller slice than Russia and quite possibly Kazakhstan too?

[OSR stands with Israel]

Well from the quote here it says he views 2021 borders as different than 2013 ones.

... and how is that not simping for Putin, exactly?

Our own military doenst think Crimea can be taken back

https://www.politico.com/amp/news/2023/02/01/ukraine-crimea-russia-pentagon-00080799

I've effectively treated Crimea as Russian land for basically all purposes since 2014. It has been Russian in terms of ownership for 80% of the past 250 years and it has been for many, many decades, majority Russian by ethnicity.
Ukrainian feelings notwithstanding, the place really isn't Ukrainian. I'm willing to accept the idea of Ukraine getting it back if that is good for the overall picture, but let's not tread into historical illiteracy here. The Crimea that once existed died with Stalin's internal ethnic cleansings in the 1930s and 1940s at the latest. You may as well argue for Transylvania to be given, part and parcel, back to Hungary.

Crimea also didn’t really resist Russia while Eastern Ukrainian absolutely has which is why I think Eastern Ukraine should be fought for and should be a line in the sand for us but Crimea is a different story .

[Badger]

Lol, Reagan hated communism, not Russia. He'd probably be close to DeSantis' position if still alive.

I don't know why Reagan would choose Russia over NATO, regardless of whether or not the USSR and the Cold War still exist.

He wouldn't be pro Russia like Trump but he'd mostly just stay out of it and provide minimum level support to Ukraine at best. Russia is no longer communist so he wouldn't care that much. A 2023 Reagan would be extremely focused on China.

If someone like Reagan was in the WH , Russia never would have invaded Ukraine to begin with . The fact is Obama’s FP , Trump’s FP and Biden’s FP in 2021 were all pretty weak towards Russia and in general trying to not seem as neocon as possible which made Russia think the US was weak .

This would not have been the case with Ronald Reagan whose FP in general would be far more aggressive than our FP since 2008 but at the same time wouldn’t be anywhere near as dumb or incompetent as Bush era neocons as well.

(Yawn) I wondered what line of tripe you were going to argue to be Ron's boot licker yet again. So the  here is really not to say it is for wanting to basically cut Ukraine's Lifeline off, but bidens fault because he "let" Rusdia invade, after Obama was supposedly "soft" on russia, compared to Trump's policy which was basically for long years of non-stop public fellatio of Putin. Totes makes sense to me.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Lol, Reagan hated communism, not Russia. He'd probably be close to DeSantis' position if still alive.

I don't know why Reagan would choose Russia over NATO, regardless of whether or not the USSR and the Cold War still exist.

He wouldn't be pro Russia like Trump but he'd mostly just stay out of it and provide minimum level support to Ukraine at best. Russia is no longer communist so he wouldn't care that much. A 2023 Reagan would be extremely focused on China.

If someone like Reagan was in the WH , Russia never would have invaded Ukraine to begin with . The fact is Obama’s FP , Trump’s FP and Biden’s FP in 2021 were all pretty weak towards Russia and in general trying to not seem as neocon as possible which made Russia think the US was weak .

This would not have been the case with Ronald Reagan whose FP in general would be far more aggressive than our FP since 2008 but at the same time wouldn’t be anywhere near as dumb or incompetent as Bush era neocons as well.

(Yawn) I wondered what line of tripe you were going to argue to be Ron's boot licker yet again. So the  here is really not to say it is for wanting to basically cut Ukraine's Lifeline off, but bidens fault because he "let" Rusdia invade, after Obama was supposedly "soft" on russia, compared to Trump's policy which was basically for long years of non-stop public fellatio of Putin. Totes makes sense to me.

I blamed Obama  , Trump and Biden for all being weak because the Bush years had an unfortunate side effect in American politics of being against any preemptive actions/responses whatsoever . Yes though Obama was extremely weak on Russia from 2009-2014 after Russia already invaded Georgia because liberals created the idea in the Bush years that American aggression was to blame for all the world's problems

[OSR stands with Israel]

Lol, Reagan hated communism, not Russia. He'd probably be close to DeSantis' position if still alive.

I don't know why Reagan would choose Russia over NATO, regardless of whether or not the USSR and the Cold War still exist.

He wouldn't be pro Russia like Trump but he'd mostly just stay out of it and provide minimum level support to Ukraine at best. Russia is no longer communist so he wouldn't care that much. A 2023 Reagan would be extremely focused on China.

Anyway I disagree you with this as you would have a point if you were talking about Richard Nixon because Nixon was purely in favor of a Realpolitick FP and in many ways similar to DeSantis here but Reagan would definitely still take a more interventionist stance.

My guess is Reagan's stance would be for the US to also try to help fund an insurgency or a Coup in Belarus and Georgia to strain Russian resources and force them to divert troops they otherwise would be using in Ukraine.

[America Needs R'hllor]

https://twitter.com/TheCalvinCooli1/status/1635448447452037121

The quote is in this video , and it’s pretty much the same answer he gave before and talking about a blank check . Don’t support this policy either but not the same thing as Hindsight is saying

https://flvoicenews.com/desantis-warns-of-escalation-in-ukraine-urges-u-s-against-proxy-war/

These things can escalate, and I don’t think it’s in our interest to be getting into proxy war – with China getting involved – over things like the border lands, or over Crimea,” he said. “I think it would behoove them to identify what is the strategic objective they’re trying to achieve.”

“Just saying it’s an open ended blank check that is not acceptable,” DeSantis said.

The governor was asked what a “win” would look like for Ukraine.

“The fear of Russia going into NATO countries [and] steamrolling – you know, that has not even come close to happening. I think they’ve shown themselves to be a third rate military power,” he said.

You picked the quote where he's merely minimizing the dispute. How about including the one where he's supporting Russian propaganda by calling this ruthless invasion a "territorial dispute":

“While the U.S. has many vital national interests — securing our borders, addressing the crisis of readiness within our military, achieving energy security and independence, and checking the economic, cultural, and military power of the Chinese Communist Party — becoming further entangled in a territorial dispute between Ukraine and Russia is not one of them."

It's clear that, unless Haley or Pence manage to pick up steam, 2024 is an existential election for Ukraine.

[Shaula🏳️‍⚧️]

DeSantis gives the same nonsense about "no blank check" and essentially takes the same position as Biden when he says the red lines for aid are boots on the ground and F-15s.
Can people pls stop pretending DeSantis has a Trump/Tucker foreign policy?
If he was in office we would be sending just as much if not more aid to Ukraine.

Trump is the one trying to find real peace by wanting to stop giving money as well as make a peace treaty that includes Ukraine giving up territory.

[หมูเด้ง]

Democrats need to work more with military people and hawks.

[Shaula🏳️‍⚧️]

Democrats need to work more with military people and hawks.

They do. That's why most hawks are democrats now and the Pentagon is basically all never-Trumpers.

[Skill and Chance]

Given the most recent NY-GOV and NJ-GOV results and what happened to the NYC area congressional districts last year, I would strongly advise Dems against leaning into this Meatball Ron thing too much.

[Sir Mohamed]

Mr. DeSantis is just an opportunist with no core beliefs other than "owning the libs".

Ukraine unfortunately was inevitably becoming a more partisan issue as the war progresses, which certainly is something Putler has always banked on (as opposed to European allies, whose support he wants to weaken by increasing energy prices). I think the whole debate here is just a sign of time in which the GOP fully becomes a nationalist and isolationist party that seeks to retreat from the world stage while Dems stand for multilateralism and a global economy.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Democrats need to work more with military people and hawks.

They do. That's why most hawks are democrats now and the Pentagon is basically all never-Trumpers.

Our military leadership is far more rational than you think . Most of the stuff people blame on military leadership was more the politicians disregarding military leadership advice and going ahead with what they wanted .

Vietnam - McNamara literally micromanaged the war from the pentagon rather than let our generals on the ground make them decisions

Iraq- Military experts told W that his plan in Iraq wasn’t good enough to maintain Iraq security but Bush decided to listen to Rumsfled who was not a military expert instead and it led to disaster. In fact replacing Rumsfeld with an actual military expert led to a drastic reduction in violence in Iraq .

In Ukraine - They generally have been correct so far

[OSR stands with Israel]

https://twitter.com/TheCalvinCooli1/status/1635448447452037121

The quote is in this video , and it’s pretty much the same answer he gave before and talking about a blank check . Don’t support this policy either but not the same thing as Hindsight is saying

https://flvoicenews.com/desantis-warns-of-escalation-in-ukraine-urges-u-s-against-proxy-war/

These things can escalate, and I don’t think it’s in our interest to be getting into proxy war – with China getting involved – over things like the border lands, or over Crimea,” he said. “I think it would behoove them to identify what is the strategic objective they’re trying to achieve.”

“Just saying it’s an open ended blank check that is not acceptable,” DeSantis said.

The governor was asked what a “win” would look like for Ukraine.

“The fear of Russia going into NATO countries [and] steamrolling – you know, that has not even come close to happening. I think they’ve shown themselves to be a third rate military power,” he said.

You picked the quote where he's merely minimizing the dispute. How about including the one where he's supporting Russian propaganda by calling this ruthless invasion a "territorial dispute":

“While the U.S. has many vital national interests — securing our borders, addressing the crisis of readiness within our military, achieving energy security and independence, and checking the economic, cultural, and military power of the Chinese Communist Party — becoming further entangled in a territorial dispute between Ukraine and Russia is not one of them."

It's clear that, unless Haley or Pence manage to pick up steam, 2024 is an existential election for Ukraine.

He also said this :

Without question, peace should be the objective. The U.S. should not provide assistance that could require the deployment of American troops or enable Ukraine to engage in offensive operations beyond its borders.  F-16s and long-range missiles should therefore be off the table. These moves would risk explicitly drawing the United States into the conflict and drawing us closer to a hot war between the world’s two largest nuclear powers. That risk is unacceptable.

A policy of “regime change” in Russia (no doubt popular among the DC foreign policy interventionists) would greatly increase the stakes of the conflict, making the use of nuclear weapons more likely.  Such a policy would neither stop the death and destruction of the war, nor produce a pro-American, Madisonian constitutionalist in the Kremlin. History indicates that Putin’s successor, in this hypothetical, would likely be even more ruthless.  The costs to achieve such a dubious outcome could become astronomical.   

The Biden administration’s policies have driven Russia into a de facto alliance with China. Because China has not and will not abide by the embargo, Russia has increased its foreign revenues while China benefits from cheaper fuel. Coupled with his intentional depletion of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and support for the Left’s Green New Deal, Biden has further empowered Russia’s energy-dominated economy and Putin’s war machine at Americans’ expense.

Our citizens are also entitled to know how the billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars are being utilized in Ukraine. 

We cannot prioritize intervention in an escalating foreign war over the defense of our own homeland, especially as tens of thousands of Americans are dying every year from narcotics smuggled across our open border and our weapons arsenals critical for our own security are rapidly being depleted."

So he basically does support the defensive aid that we have given so far which is why he says no to specifies the offensive one here . He basically is trying to appease the paleocons rhetorically without actually doing doing so policy wise

He is playing basically the typical politician statement of trying to please everyone in their party and not offend anyone as well . Let me be clear though that I am not a fan of these types of statements and would prefer clear policy statements to be made but many nominees in general try to pretend to be more anti intervention then they are in order to get votes(Nixon and W did this too ). He is not praising Putin or Russia though which is why it’s misleading to title a thread like this .

It’s why I praised Reagan in this thread cause he was the one Republican nominee who became president  who didn’t criticize the Democrats interventionist foreign policy(he instead made the opposite argument) and was willing to stand strong on his principles even as a candidate in a way very few politicians have .

[vitoNova]

Democrats need to work more with military people and hawks.

Fixed.

[Yoda]

Does the GOP's newly-discovered anti-war, anti-military spending, isolationist foreign policy stance include Israel as well? Or do we only abandon our allies when they are fighting  for survival against Putin?

[หมูเด้ง]

Democrats need to work more with military people and hawks.

They do. That's why most hawks are democrats now and the Pentagon is basically all never-Trumpers.

If this were the case, that would be ideal. 80 years ago, the moral confusion that threatened our civilization came from the right, then in the 60s, it started coming from the left, and now for the last 10 years, it’s been coming from the right again.

Iraq is literally the new Vietnam. That is, the same people who started the war were the hawks and after the war, they became the doves. Take from that what you want.

[TheTide]

https://twitter.com/TheCalvinCooli1/status/1635448447452037121

The quote is in this video , and it’s pretty much the same answer he gave before and talking about a blank check . Don’t support this policy either but not the same thing as Hindsight is saying

https://flvoicenews.com/desantis-warns-of-escalation-in-ukraine-urges-u-s-against-proxy-war/

These things can escalate, and I don’t think it’s in our interest to be getting into proxy war – with China getting involved – over things like the border lands, or over Crimea,” he said. “I think it would behoove them to identify what is the strategic objective they’re trying to achieve.”

“Just saying it’s an open ended blank check that is not acceptable,” DeSantis said.

The governor was asked what a “win” would look like for Ukraine.

“The fear of Russia going into NATO countries [and] steamrolling – you know, that has not even come close to happening. I think they’ve shown themselves to be a third rate military power,” he said.

I suspect the world leaders and governments who are taking a more 'hawkish' stance on this would privately concur with many of these points. As is usually the case with war, though, rhetoric is vital as well as actions.

[Shaula🏳️‍⚧️]

Democrats need to work more with military people and hawks.

They do. That's why most hawks are democrats now and the Pentagon is basically all never-Trumpers.

If this were the case, that would be ideal. 80 years ago, the moral confusion that threatened our civilization came from the right, then in the 60s, it started coming from the left, and now for the last 10 years, it’s been coming from the right again.

Iraq is literally the new Vietnam. That is, the same people who started the war were the hawks and after the war, they became the doves. Take from that what you want.

I actually disagree. Almost all the people who supported the Iraq war still are hawks. Even the FOX-watching boomers still are. Sure there are a few exceptions like Hawley, but most of the isolationist Republicans nowadays were against the Iraq war at the time.
Almost every congressional Republican back then are still neocons now, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Bolton, all neocon never-Trumpers. The Trumpiest people now we're probably anti-war democrats back then, including Trump himself.

[Hindsight was 2020]

https://mobile.twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1635996078565646340

[หมูเด้ง]

https://mobile.twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1635996078565646340

Soft on Ukraine = Soft on Taiwan = Soft on American Trade and Influence = Soft on American Business = Soft on American Defense. It isn’t hard to understand. This isn’t Steve Bannon’s master plan, folks.

Post 35K

[Skill and Chance]

Does anyone think this will still be a hot war on 1/20/2025?

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

Does anyone think this will still be a hot war on 1/20/2025?

I lean against, but it's horribly plausible.

[You are responsible]

While I don't necessarily agree with Horus' stance that Reagan would have largely stayed out of Ukraine (since Reagan was the ultimate role model for all the hardcore neocons etc. and Putin's recent actions constitute a direct challenge to NATO's authority in the greater scheme of things) his assessment still provides some insight as to why many of the contemporary "Trumpist" Republicans do indeed hold such views:

American conservatism traditionally views itself as an ideological counterpoint to communism and derived much of its identity from it for a long time. Whether this still contains much (if any) actual meaning nowadays when Trumpists apply "opposition to Marxism" to pretty much anything they are offended by from Disney movies to the NFL is a different point entirely.

What is important however, that they don't assume the same ideological repudiation when it comes to the Putinism of our days. In some ways they even align with the ideological foundations of the Russian president. It's really no coincidence, for instance, that Putin regularly includes anti-LGBTIQ messages in his foreign policy speeches, because those are likely designed to serve as a dog whistle for "anti-wokeness" activists in the West.

This results in a bit of a weird alternate reality in which - according to the likes of Trump, DeSantis and so on - Bob Iger happens to be some sort of the ideological heir to Leonid Brezhnev, while Vladimir Putin is at least deemed to be an inoffensive character.

[Badger]

Lol, Reagan hated communism, not Russia. He'd probably be close to DeSantis' position if still alive.

I don't know why Reagan would choose Russia over NATO, regardless of whether or not the USSR and the Cold War still exist.

He wouldn't be pro Russia like Trump but he'd mostly just stay out of it and provide minimum level support to Ukraine at best. Russia is no longer communist so he wouldn't care that much. A 2023 Reagan would be extremely focused on China.

If someone like Reagan was in the WH , Russia never would have invaded Ukraine to begin with . The fact is Obama’s FP , Trump’s FP and Biden’s FP in 2021 were all pretty weak towards Russia and in general trying to not seem as neocon as possible which made Russia think the US was weak .

This would not have been the case with Ronald Reagan whose FP in general would be far more aggressive than our FP since 2008 but at the same time wouldn’t be anywhere near as dumb or incompetent as Bush era neocons as well.

(Yawn) I wondered what line of tripe you were going to argue to be Ron's boot licker yet again. So the  here is really not to say it is for wanting to basically cut Ukraine's Lifeline off, but bidens fault because he "let" Rusdia invade, after Obama was supposedly "soft" on russia, compared to Trump's policy which was basically for long years of non-stop public fellatio of Putin. Totes makes sense to me.

I blamed Obama  , Trump and Biden for all being weak because the Bush years had an unfortunate side effect in American politics of being against any preemptive actions/responses whatsoever . Yes though Obama was extremely weak on Russia from 2009-2014 after Russia already invaded Georgia because liberals created the idea in the Bush years that American aggression was to blame for all the world's problems

Imagine being such a partisan hack to look back from 2009 through 2020 and decide that it was the Obama Administration with a record of being overly accommodating to Putin.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Lol, Reagan hated communism, not Russia. He'd probably be close to DeSantis' position if still alive.

I don't know why Reagan would choose Russia over NATO, regardless of whether or not the USSR and the Cold War still exist.

He wouldn't be pro Russia like Trump but he'd mostly just stay out of it and provide minimum level support to Ukraine at best. Russia is no longer communist so he wouldn't care that much. A 2023 Reagan would be extremely focused on China.

If someone like Reagan was in the WH , Russia never would have invaded Ukraine to begin with . The fact is Obama’s FP , Trump’s FP and Biden’s FP in 2021 were all pretty weak towards Russia and in general trying to not seem as neocon as possible which made Russia think the US was weak .

This would not have been the case with Ronald Reagan whose FP in general would be far more aggressive than our FP since 2008 but at the same time wouldn’t be anywhere near as dumb or incompetent as Bush era neocons as well.

(Yawn) I wondered what line of tripe you were going to argue to be Ron's boot licker yet again. So the  here is really not to say it is for wanting to basically cut Ukraine's Lifeline off, but bidens fault because he "let" Rusdia invade, after Obama was supposedly "soft" on russia, compared to Trump's policy which was basically for long years of non-stop public fellatio of Putin. Totes makes sense to me.

I blamed Obama  , Trump and Biden for all being weak because the Bush years had an unfortunate side effect in American politics of being against any preemptive actions/responses whatsoever . Yes though Obama was extremely weak on Russia from 2009-2014 after Russia already invaded Georgia because liberals created the idea in the Bush years that American aggression was to blame for all the world's problems

Imagine being such a partisan hack to look back from 2009 through 2020 and decide that it was the Obama Administration with a record of being overly accommodating to Putin.

Obama was weaker on Russia than Trump policy wise and that’s just a fact . Obama after Russia already invaded Georgia did the whole Russian reset policy and attacked Republicans for being too tough on Russia .