🎯 Inconstancy is deadly. It also further exposes the futility of defense-only support. A nation cannot long survive under constant barrages even if they shoot down 90%. They have to be able to go on offense, to destroy the launchers, to raise the costs for Russia.
Allowing Putin to murder Ukrainian civilians daily for "as long as it takes" is unacceptable. If its allies want to war to end, Ukraine must be armed to win. If this doesn’t happen, Putin believes he can wait out Western aid.
How pathetic it is that after two years of Putin's all-out war on Ukraine, EU & US support wavers more than China, Iran, and North Korea's for Russia. The free world has every advantage except will. Economic & military might to crush Russia in Ukraine 10 times over and it sits.
The cost will be far higher when NATO is involved directly. And why wouldn’t Putin do it, after its most powerful member states keep backing down now? Remember, the risk isn’t if Russia can win, it's if Putin thinks the West won’t fight. Same for Taiwan.
NATO is a piece of paper in the end, and without the collective will to fight, its defense promises are worthless. When Russia increases hybrid warfare against Poland and Latvia, will the US and Germany rush to their aid or find more excuses? What does Putin see now?
The Republicans are blocking Ukraine aid so they can say Biden wasted billions if things get worse. The White House can refute that cynical ploy by using executive power to do what is right for American interests by seizing Russian assets and arming Ukraine to win now.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
July 4 is about 1776, and I’m fond of posting quotes from and about the Founding Fathers, who hindsight confirms as the greatest collection of talent, knowledge, and courage ever assembled. But this year I’m starting with 1788, and Federalist Paper 69. guides.loc.gov/federalist-pap…
In it, and the subsequent Papers, Alexander Hamilton enumerates the differences between the US presidency and the monarchy. That is, why the American president is not a king, and how his power is constrained by law in many ways a king's or despot's is not.
Hamilton places great emphasis on how the presidency's great powers are constrained by the "advice and consent of the Senate" and by the threat of impeachment should he overstep. I leave it to you to read it and decide if such constraints are in effect today.
Good comparison, because a military is what Trump wants. His own personal federal National Guard. It's called Rosgvardiya in Russia, or call it a praetorian guard or gestapo. ICE will be the most powerful military force on the ground in the country, under the command of the DOJ.
Every Republican who voted for this will be guilty when this force is used against American citizens. He's already talking about deporting them. It will begin with "subversive elements," and "enemies of the people," as it always does.
Trump already tried to overthrow an election. If you're counting on his personal squeamishness over the use of force, those around him are far more ruthless. No need to deal with states or governors & the National Guard. Trumpguardia will be there for every contrived emergency.
I encourage you to see the reader comments on Mamdani and socialism and my responses below. A few summary remarks for those who have never experienced socialism, let alone communism, and why it's been a siren song for idealists & a Trojan horse for authoritarians for a century.
"Socialism" has become a talisman for the left in the free world, everything they like from public education to healthcare. But even the most robust welfare states in democracies were built on the spectacular success of capitalism. Don't kill the golden goose to get to the eggs.
The bait and switch is always about power. Sooner than later, even when sincere, attempts to enforce equity requires growing limits on freedom. As for the insincere, there's a reason the worst fascist movements of the early 20th century started with socialist branding. It sells.
Socialism is like polio, it comes back when people forget about the horrible damage it did last time.
Talking about socialism is a luxury paid for by the successes of capitalism. As I wrote in 2016:
"A popular rebuttal is to invoke the socialist leanings of several European countries with high living standards, especially in Scandinavia. Why can’t America be more like happy Denmark, with its high taxes and giant public sector, or at least more like France? Even the more pro-free-market United Kingdom has national health care, after all. First off, comparing relatively small, homogeneous populations to the churning, ocean-spanning American giant is rarely useful. And even the most socialist of the European countries only became wealthy enough to embrace redistribution after free-market success made them rich. Still, why cannot America follow this path if that is what the people want? What is the problem if American voters are willing to accept higher taxes in exchange for greater security in the embrace of the government?
The answer takes us back to all those inventions America has produced decade after decade. As long as Europe had America taking risks, investing ambitiously, attracting the world’s dreamers and entrepreneurs, and yes, being unequal, it could benefit from the results without making the same sacrifices. Add to that the incalculable windfall of not having to spend on national defense thanks to America’s massive investment in a global security umbrella. America doesn’t have the same luxury of coasting on the ambition and sacrifice of another country."
Link to that article: Garry Kasparov: Hey, Bernie, Don’t Lecture Me About Socialism. I Lived Through It. kasparov.com/garry-kasparov…
Graham's "overwhelming support" for this sanctions bill is becoming Trump’s "two more weeks" when it comes to action against Russia. Putin clearly doesn’t think they’ll really do anything—other than reduce aid to Ukraine, which they actually did.
Putin is the poker player, the bluffer with a weak hand but even weaker opponents who keep folding their winning cards. Trump, Macron, Starmer, Merz, so much talk. Western leaders have blustered and caved so many times that there is no longer any credible deterrence, only action.
Events taking shape in California can be an example for the nation to follow, or they can be the harbinger of a long, hot summer. Do protesters want change for the better or just to help Trump by trying to rule the ashes? Link below. 👇
My piece on the LA protests and how Trump's opponents can respond and join me + @UrielEpshtein today @ 5pm ET/2pm PT LIVE at The Next Move from @Renew_Democracy. Read + subscribe below. thenextmove.org/p/i-resisted-p…
I concur with the thought of MLK Jr that if they can’t attack your principles they will attack how you protest to defend them. The point of protest is discomfort, to shake the status quo when justice is unjust. But leaving the path of nonviolence only aids the oppressor.