According to a fact sheet published by the U.S. Department of State on September 3, 2021, titled “U.S. Relations With Russia”:
“The Kremlin increasingly relies on repression to stifle civil society and critical voices, including new legislation restricting educational and cultural exchange programs, designating media outlets and NGOs as ‘foreign agents,’ more pervasive use of the so-called “undesirable foreign organization” designation, and even using the COVID-19 pandemic as a justification to further restrict freedom of expression and assembly. The Russian government uses arbitrary designations, criminal convictions, and administrative barriers to disqualify potential opposition candidates, ensuring no independent voices can participate in government processes.”
Sounds like quite the place for freedom-loving individuals, doesn’t it?
As is well known, there is a chunk of the Russian military, about 100,000 of them, on the Ukrainian border.
They are not there for a little R&R.
Something is likely to go sideways.
Which means the shooting begins.
Presumably Vladimir Putin would like to take the land of Ukraine and bring it back to the bosom of Mother Russia.
That whole “Soviet Union” thing ultimately didn’t work out. So Putin seems to be interested in bringing back as much turf as he can.
According to Politico, in March 2014, John McCain, then the Republican senator from Arizona, said on the floor of the Senate: “I have no illusions or worry about the long-term future of Russia. Russia is now a gas station masquerading as a country.”
Putin makes a lot of money on gas.
But one of the things he is against is the Ukraine joining NATO.
NATO describes itself as having two functions, political and military.
The political part: “NATO promotes democratic values and enables members to consult and cooperate on defense and security-related issues to solve problems, build trust and, in the long run, prevent conflict.”
Which doesn’t sound much like the aforementioned description of what the Kremlin wants. “Democratic values”? Bah.
Then there is the military part: “NATO is committed to the peaceful resolution of disputes. If diplomatic efforts fail, it has the military power to undertake crisis-management operations. These are carried out under the collective defense clause of NATO's founding treaty - Article 5 of the Washington Treaty or under a United Nations mandate, alone or in cooperation with other countries and international organizations.”
Notice, this is about defense, not offense.
Those Russian soldiers aren’t there on the border because there is concern in Moscow that Ukrainian tanks are going to start rolling east.
The U.S. has, by and large, been in favor of things like democratic states. (Some MAGA people might misunderstand the last two words in that sentence: No, it doesn’t refer to New York or California.)
Republicans used to be bullish on democracy.
Seems that may be changing.
Fox’s Tucker Carlson has been a voice against the U.S. trying to defend the Ukrainian people against the possible incursion of Russian troops.
Axios quotes Carlson as saying this: "I just want to go on the record and say I could care less if they call me a pawn of Putin.
"It's too stupid. I don't speak Russian. I've never been to Russia. I'm not that interested in Russia. All I care about is the fortunes of the United States, because I have four children who live here."
That’s right: Let a foe of democracy do whatever he wants to as long as it doesn’t disturb Carlson.
Freedom, schmeedon, right Tucker?
There are plenty of reasons to avoid a military response to Russia’s saber rattling on its border with Ukraine, including an aversion to starting World War III. The fact that Tucker Carlson has spawned four children isn’t among them. Putin is one scary bastard and our most recent president spent his entire term kissing his ass. That may not have caused the situation we’re in now, but it sure didn’t help. As usual, Republicans leave a mess and the adults in the room have to figure out a way to resolve it. This time it may cost a whole lot of lives.