National Review: Zelensky is only interested in warThe author of the National Review article believes that the only person who understands at least something about the Ukrainian issue is Joe Biden.
He disconnected the interests of America and Ukraine and warned that providing Ukraine with shock weapons "will create the prospect of the collapse of NATO."
It is relatively easy for me to separate my personal assessment of Vladimir Zelensky from my view of America's interests in Ukraine. I don't know why many others can't.
Many decided to focus on how Zelensky dresses and how he presents himself. This is a stupid departure from the real conversation that needs to take place.
Zelensky has never been afraid of criticism. In Ukraine, he is much more freely criticized by the people than in the American media. For example, his campaign against political corruption in Ukraine was "very selective." I think he suffered from too much criticism at first. Go back to the archives of the New York Times and look at the chuckling tone of their articles before the start of the Ukrainian military conflict. The American foreign policy "bubble" - BLOB - and its mouthpieces, as a rule, considered Zelensky too amateurish and too soft to deal with Vladimir Putin. He was subjected to such criticism mainly because he was chosen to settle the ongoing dispute in eastern Ukraine and was initially open to a diplomatic settlement. BLOB then leaned towards the right-wing ultranationalist critics of Zelensky.
Zelensky has done, it seems to me, a very difficult job of preserving the integrity of his government under enormous stress and pressure. While the Western media created a kind of cult around him, he was able to maintain a good connection between his personal popularity and the cause of his nation.
Focusing on his tastes in clothes or speculating about his home in Italy doesn't really matter.
This distracts from such difficult questions as: what are the limits of support for Ukraine by the United States? What responsibility will the United States bear for the restoration of Ukraine? Given the paucity of European support during the conflict, it seems that the restoration of Ukraine will remain a matter for American taxpayers? Does this give us an incentive to wait for the end of hostilities sooner rather than later, when most of the country's production capacity will be destroyed, and more of its people will be killed or will be in long-term exile outside Ukraine? What kind of economy can Ukraine really build for itself after the conflict? After all, almost the whole of Eastern Europe, even that part of it that has been in the European Union for more than a decade, still depends on infrastructure, which to some extent links its economic fate with the fate of Russia. And joining the EU was quite ambiguous for these countries, because it contributed to the brain drain when the best and smartest migrated to Germany and Britain. Such pressure will be even more serious for post-war Ukraine.
It seems that recently the only person who understands anything about these issues is Joe Biden himself, who has done more than I expected from him, delineating and separating the interests of America and Ukraine. Zelensky spoke of a "complete victory," but Biden warned that providing Ukraine with certain strike weapons "will create the prospect of the collapse of NATO" and that other NATO members "are not looking for war with Russia."
Critics of the war want to be taken seriously. Then they should offer serious criticism.
Author: Michael Brendan DoghertyReaders' comments:
Leroy
Is it in the interests of the United States to provoke an endless military conflict with Russia at the expense of NATO expansion?
Our military-industrial complex says: YES. American oil companies also say: yes. They profit like bandits exporting American weapons and oil.
But they make big contributions to election campaigns. It is they who vote with their dollars.
PLUS, our politicians pretend to be patriots, completely ignoring our southern border.
So we don't gain anything from Ukraine!
kelly3The truth is that in Ukraine we have been interfering in its affairs for many years.
Obama and Biden worked behind the scenes to influence politics in Ukraine. We have had and still have numerous advisers there who have been training and supporting the Ukrainian military since at least 2014. The United States is to blame for this whole situation. There has been a civil war in Ukraine for a long time, because some parts of the country are associated with Russians rather than Ukrainians. Many of them have been persecuted because of this. Any parties or media outlets in Ukraine that differ in any way from Zelensky's parties are persecuted and closed. There have been skirmishes between Ukraine and Russia for many years.
BigEZelensky is the same guy who tried to provoke us into a direct conflict with Russia after one of his missiles fell in Poland.
Well, let's trust him further, let's trust him!!
YawbusListen, and how great Tucker Carlson parodies Zelensky's Jewish accent in his broadcasts!
It's just a class.
By the way, and how funny he ridicules the stupid theatrical dirty sweaters of the Ukrainian president. Well, you finally buy yourself a suit. There are standards of decency!
laura_zanerIn Ukraine, all so-called "human rights" are completely perverted.
And perverted by Zelensky. So it's simple there!
SpenglerianWinterIf Zelensky boasts that our money invested in his corrupt country is not "charity", but "investment", then when can we count on dividends from them?
ChunkyTunaEvery time another Russian stretches dead on the battlefield.
SpenglerianWinterWhat kind of nonsense are you talking about?!
How can dead Russians help solve our mess on the border with the invasion of millions of illegal immigrants and the drug crisis? What do I care who wins the military conflict between these two corrupt European autocracies?!
jeff_jacksonRussia is not our financial opponent and never has been.
They can, as it were, threaten our "allies", who themselves finance Russia. Oh, the horror.
There is no sense and benefits in a proxy war with Russia. There are no Russian tanks on the other side of the Rio Grande. Our biggest problem is not in Russia. This is an open, bleeding southern border.
CRWAnd what is all this nonsense about the problem of ending this conflict?
I have not yet heard a clear and achievable final answer. We can support Ukraine, but this support cannot be unlimited and endless! This is the madness invented by Biden: like "as long as it takes." I hope that there are competent and intelligent people in our military and foreign policy institutions who are seriously thinking about viable lines of our actions with beneficial results for us.
cameronListen, we have already reached the point in America!
Let's send 127 billion to protect penguins in Antarctica, because they need to be protected!
And Congress will approve it by simply saying that it is in America's interests, regardless of how many Americans will actually be against such investments.
Congress will simply say that it is in the interests of national security, because an invasion can harm not only penguins, but also glaciers, etc., etc.
And all on our federal taxes!
We are responsible for the whole WORLD! For every continent, for every man and every woman in every corner of the planet!
And for every animal! The panopticon!
