The phrase "second thoughts" usually implies changing an opinion or a decision. But my second thoughts on Ukraine, Russia, and the United States have only brought me to double down on opinions previously expressed, to wit:
As regards the U.S.: Even conceding that U.S. and NATO hesitancy to get directly, militarily involved may give us the comforting feeling that we might thus avoid World War III, our refusal to provide the equipment needed for Ukraine to try to defend its own airspace is shockingly immoral and inhumane. Cowardly, too, because here again we have let Putin set the terms of this confrontation. Did I say "short-sighted? Perhaps I didn't say it, but it's strongly implied in my last post.
About a week ago, Joe Scarborough, writing in The Washington Post, offered some advice for President Biden with which I wholeheartedly agree. One element was to stop letting Putin set the terms. A second was to stop constantly telling the Russian leader what we are not going to do. However wise that approach may be for calming the U.S. and European public, it tells Putin far too much about the limits of our engagement.
As regards Russia: Russia is destroying a nation: its infrastructure, its spirit, its government, and its people. It is now estimated that as many as 9 million Ukrainians will flee as refugees. It's time to speak the word "genocide." I haven't heard it yet, though Biden did throw off a remark that Putin is a war criminal. The war isn't over yet, and we applaud the resistance of the Ukrainian people and military, but how many truly doubt that Russia will prevail? Looking ahead a few weeks, when Russian troops are at the Polish (and other) borders, what would stop Putin from continuing into Poland? Biden has said we and our NATO allies will defend every inch of the territory of NATO members. Are the troops in place to do that ... really do that? It seems to me that Putin, rightly or wrongly, may discount our resolve. He has learned that all he need do is shake his nuclear thingy at us, and we'll faint away like the maiden in some Victorian novel.
As regards Ukraine: How does Ukraine, fighting for its life as a nation, end up last in this discussion? Well, sadly, that's exactly where it has been for the past several months. It's a pawn between superpowers. We're offering sympathy and shock and humanitarian assistance, but for the rest, "you remain in our thoughts and prayers" - now there's a singularly empty phrase!
Back to the U.S.: Where does this leave us? This is the demented Putin's war; it's not even clear that his oligarchs and military leaders are with him. U.S. Senator Lindsay Graham opined early on that Putin should be "taken out." Not to dinner. That's not in the cards, and probably not in the realm of possibility for us. But what Russian will have the courage to end the madness?
A note for readers: If you had previously signed up to receive new posts from Morning Fog as they were issued ...Sorry, but that app (Feedburner) is no longer available, you will need to enter your email again, in the upper-right corner, to subscribe. Thanks!
Coming Up Soon on Morning Fog, a more salubrious topic: An End to Daylight Saving Time.
Ah, here I am. Tried to comment on your last but failed to get in.
Glad to see you're still here and I agree with all you've said. It's a real conundrum for the US. The attack on Ukraine did not, I believe, begin as intended genocide. It was to be just a land grab. But the unexpectedly determined resistance of the Ukrainian people is resulting in that.
If Ukraine falls, I hope Putin will be satisfied, declare victory, and go home. I hope by then he will be too weak to go further and invade any NATO nations. But I'm not privy to the mind of a madman. I hate, HATE, that we aren't doing more to help Ukraine, but WWIII is definitely a possibility when a madman has nukes.
Posted by: PiedType | March 20, 2022 at 01:38 PM