The leader of the GOP did not embrace Putin (or other despots) out of ignorance. He knew what they did. And he admired it. He would "joke" he wished he could brutalize the press like they did. He wanted to suppress dissent like they did. He wanted to shoot peaceful protestors...
...and send in the 82d Airborne division against BLM protestors. He defended right wing thugs. He encouraged people at his rallies to use violence against those with political views. He welcomed and defended Russian attacks on our democracy.
Trump tried to block sanctions against Russia for its abuses and railed furiously when they were imposed against Russia for using chemical weapons against Putin's enemies in the UK. Trump promoted a coup against American democracy.
Trump's own cabinet members stated his plan was to pull the U.S. out of NATO. He was impeached for withholding aid to Ukraine (and he sought to support pro-Russian actors within Ukraine against pro-Western reformers.)
Let's not pretend that Trump or the GOP were accidentally promoting Putin or doing it just to own the libs. Let's not pretend they're doing it now casually or unaware of what they're really supporting. Know that it was not only conscious but part of a long-standing pattern.
They are all one team. They are all one threat. And every little bit of pro-Putin spin--every GOP official who attacks Zelensky or suggests the gas price spikes driven by Putin's war have something to do with the current administration--is part of that effort & deadly dangerous.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This morning on @Morning_Joe@JoeNBC asked me, and I'm paraphrasing, what it was going to take for the West to defend Ukraine, to step up and defend the innocent people of that country from slaughter at the hands of the Russians. I offered up a pretty standard answer.
I said we would ramp up military aid and so on but that it would take crossing a lot of red lines to get us to act. Sometimes discussions on TV shows just stream by, questions come and answers go and we move on. But I have to say, this question haunts me.
Because letting Ukrainians die is horrific and unjust. The story of the past century is of slaughters and genocides that occurred because the political and military calculus was that the cost of intervention was too high, too risky. And every one of those answers seemed right...
Putin likely knows he cannot win in Ukraine in the sense that he cannot take control of the country and maintain that control. He cannot make Ukraine a vassal state like Belarus. So, it seems likely that for him, the next best option is to destroy Ukraine with maximum brutality.
In so doing, he will be able to say he neutralized Ukraine's threat to Russia. He will send a warning to neighbors that this is what awaits them if he sees them as a threat. And perhaps most importantly, he will send a message to the world that he can act w/complete impunity.
What awaits Ukraine is almost certainly worse than anything we have seen to date. Re: the last point above, Putin will cross red lines to prove that he can do so. He likely believes that communicates a message of power to his people and to the world.
For those who suggest that the greatest deterrent to Russia chemical weapons use (or similar violation) in Ukraine is that Putin would immediately and forever be seen as a pariah, please see history. Russia is already an established user & enabler of chemical weapons use.
In Syria. Against its enemies. And that compounded with the wanton brutality of Russia from Chechnya to Syria to Ukraine, its use of banned munitions from cluster bombs to thermobaric weapons, and its brutality against its own citizens, should tell you all you need to know.
Putin has already established he is immune to global condemnation, has no concern for international laws or conventions and sees his cruelty as a useful tool in advancing his ambitions. The only way to stop him is to defeat him. It is not to shame or condemn him.
World War III is not going to happen. Not as a result of this war anyway. In fact, with the strengthening of NATO and the weakening of Russia, global conflagration though not a zero possibility remains extremely unlikely. But before you go to bed this Friday night...
...give a thought to what is going to happen. A nation, already being destroyed, is going to be further shattered. Tens of thousands will die. Mothers & children. Grandmothers & grandfathers. Soldiers & aid workers. Politicians & farmers. Tens of thousands will be injured.
War crimes, already begun, will get worse. Damage, already probably over $100 billion will double and triple. Much...families, businesses, communities, cultural treasures...will be forever lost, no amount of reconstruction can restore them.
The question that continues to trouble me is what happens in the event Russia does use chemical weapons? What would happen if they did create a disaster at Chernobyl? No one wins WWIII. But we've already deployed most of our sanctions options. What do Europeans do? The US?
Sadly, my thoughts to turn to Syria where the world offered press releases of condemnation after chemical attacks and in the end resigned themselves to what amounts to an Assad victory (and one for his Russian buddies.)
There are plenty of int'l institutions we could kick Russia out of...but will that achieve anything? We can offer more support to Ukraine...but what exactly? And what steps can we take to ensure it doesn't happen again? So far all the answers I see floated seem inadequate.
The fact that every single act of barbarity in which Putin has participated has been, in his eyes, a success from Chechnya to Syria to Georgia to Crimea to poisoning opposition and tossing them off balconies, has led us to this point.
Socipaths like him take and abuse until they are stopped. They are not shamed into stopping. They are not lectured into stopping. Slaps on the wrist or ominous warnings will not stop them. Red lines must be enforced. Defeats must be inflicted. Losses must be substantial.
That is not an excuse for recklessness. It is an argument to be resolute and recognize our strategic goal must not be to limit the damage he does but rather to convince him that he will pay such a great price for his crimes that he will not undertake them.