There Are Few Good Options in Ukraine, Thanks to Democrats

[Русский агент]

Western governments made promises they didn’t keep and offered assurances they can’t fulfill.

One of the challenges of setting yourself up as the world's policeman is that people may take you seriously.

Then they expect you to intervene in horrendous situations that you have limited will or capability to address.

That's the situation that faces the United States and NATO in Ukraine after the long-awaited invasion of the country by Russian forces.

For all of Ukraine's flaws, ranging from deep corruption to questionable elections, the country is a far more sympathetic party than the aggressor in this fight.

Democracy-ish is probably the best way to characterize Ukraine's government; it's classified by The Economist's Democracy Index 2021 as a "hybrid regime" with a flawed but functioning electoral system. "

Where things get complicated is that Ukraine, victim to a much more-powerful neighbor's aggression, has a decades-old claim to protection from the West under the Budapest Memorandum.

In 1994.

Who was president of the USA then?



https://reason.com/2022/02/24/there-are-few-good-options-in-ukraine-crisis/

 

[Nordberg]

They are not part of NATO. there are no deals to protect them.

 

[Legion]

There are no deals to protect them.

The Budapest Memorandum says you lie.

The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances refers to three identical political agreements signed at the OSCE conference in Budapest, Hungary on 5 December 1994 to provide security assurances by its signatories relating to the accession of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

The memorandum was originally signed by three nuclear powers: the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States. China and France gave somewhat weaker individual assurances in separate documents.

The memorandum included security assurances against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan. As a result, between 1994 and 1996, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons. Until then, Ukraine had the world's third-largest nuclear weapons stockpile.

In 2009, Russia and the United States released a joint statement that the memorandum's security assurances would still be respected after the expiration of the START Treaty.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has publicly commented on the Budapest Memorandum by arguing that it provides no true guarantee of safety.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances

Look who signed it, liar:

 

[Walt]

Democracy-ish is probably the best way to characterize Ukraine's government; it's classified by The Economist's Democracy Index 2021 as a "hybrid regime" with a flawed but functioning electoral system. "

Ukraine is ranked as a "hybrid regime", while Russia is ranked as a "authoritarian regime." The Ukraine has successfully moved from a Russian level(or worse) democracy to a Mexican level democracy. The EU is full of countries that have made the same move, and then moved the next step to being a "flawed democracy"... LIKE THE USA!!!

The Economist grades on a hard scale, but it is still a disgrace that we are only a "flawed democracy."

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2022/02/09/a-new-low-for-global-democracy

 

[Walt]

They are not part of NATO. there are no deals to protect them.

The Budapest Memorandum says you lie.

Nordberg is correct. We have not promised to protect them. We have an "understanding" that we do not want them to be invaded. That is a very different thing.

Under the NATO TREATY if Russia invaded Estonia, we would be at war with Russia. We would actually send troops to die defending Estonia. Estonia is in NATO.

Under the Budapest MEMORANDUM we [sort of] promise not to invade Ukraine, and to care if they are invaded. We have honored both promises. We are not in a state of war with Russia over this.

 

[Legion]

Nordberg is correct. We have not promised to protect them.

So you say.

 

[Port Tack]

Western governments made promises they didn’t keep and offered assurances they can’t fulfill.

One of the challenges of setting yourself up as the world's policeman is that people may take you seriously.

Then they expect you to intervene in horrendous situations that you have limited will or capability to address.

That's the situation that faces the United States and NATO in Ukraine after the long-awaited invasion of the country by Russian forces.

For all of Ukraine's flaws, ranging from deep corruption to questionable elections, the country is a far more sympathetic party than the aggressor in this fight.

Democracy-ish is probably the best way to characterize Ukraine's government; it's classified by The Economist's Democracy Index 2021 as a "hybrid regime" with a flawed but functioning electoral system. "

Where things get complicated is that Ukraine, victim to a much more-powerful neighbor's aggression, has a decades-old claim to protection from the West under the Budapest Memorandum.

In 1994.

Who was president of the USA then?



https://reason.com/2022/02/24/there-are-few-good-options-in-ukraine-crisis/

The Ukraine is not a member of NATO and they have no business protecting a non-member country.

 

[Port Tack]

The Budapest Memorandum says you lie.

The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances refers to three identical political agreements signed at the OSCE conference in Budapest, Hungary on 5 December 1994 to provide security assurances by its signatories relating to the accession of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

The memorandum was originally signed by three nuclear powers: the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States. China and France gave somewhat weaker individual assurances in separate documents.

The memorandum included security assurances against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan. As a result, between 1994 and 1996, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons. Until then, Ukraine had the world's third-largest nuclear weapons stockpile.

In 2009, Russia and the United States released a joint statement that the memorandum's security assurances would still be respected after the expiration of the START Treaty.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has publicly commented on the Budapest Memorandum by arguing that it provides no true guarantee of safety.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances

Look who signed it, liar:

NATO doesn't give 2 shits about your "Budapest Memorandum", even Zelenskyy says it provides no assurances.

 

[Legion]

NATO doesn't give 2 shits about your "Budapest Memorandum".

I don't recall saying that "NATO gives 2 shits about your "Budapest Memorandum.

It's not "mine", either, BTW. But the USA signed it in the person of disgraced DEMOCRAT Blow Job Bill.

Zelenskyy says it provides no assurances.

He would, now, because it clearly doesn't. Bungling Biden's bleating hasn't halted Putin's tanks.