ROMAN SHEREMETA
Sept 13, 2024
What is wrong with Trump’s “peace plan” and how it will be the end of Ukraine and the beginning of the World War 3.
Recently, JD Vance has publicly revealed Trump’s “peace plan” for Ukraine: (1) let russia keep all the Ukrainian territory they currently occupy (nearly 20% of Ukraine) and (2) give russia a guarantee that Ukraine will never join NATO or any other “allies institution.”
(1) Letting russia keep all the Ukrainian territory they currently occupy would mean that the russian aggression was rewarded and all dictators around the world should start attacking other countries.
This “appeasement” of the aggressor gives permission to all dictators around the world to attack other countries, knowing that eventually, like russia, they will receive something as a reward for their aggression.
Basically, China, Iran, Sudan, Ethiopia, etc., are all given permission to start their military aggressions. Essentially, this would be the beginning of the World War 3.
By the way, this is exactly how the World War 2 had started. In 1938, British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain signed the Munich agreement with Adolf Hitler, and famously called it “peace for our time.”
The Munich agreement, led to Czechoslovakia being divided by Germany, expansion of Hitler’s aggression, and eventually the beginning of the World War 2.
The same will happen if russia is rewarded for its aggression.
(2) Giving russia a guarantee that Ukraine will never join NATO or any other “allies institution” is essentially giving russia an opportunity to regain its strength and in 10 years to attack Ukraine again.
The idea that russia will magically stop future aggressions is naive. Putin has already signed a treaty in 2014 and then expanded his aggression in 2022.
Also, russia signed a peace treaty with Chechnia in 1996, only to get better prepared and come back in 1999. As a result, 25% of Chechens were killed, and the survivors were brutally forced to serve russia. Some of them are now in Ukraine as part of the russian army.
If Ukraine is not in NATO, then who will guarantee that russia will not attack Ukraine again? Will the US send its troops to guard the line or give Ukraine the nuclear weapons? If no, then how? With magic? Or another Budapest Memorandum?
In 1994, Ukraine already agreed to relinquish its nuclear arsenal. As a part of the Budapest Memorandum, Ukraine has destroyed its fleet of long-range strategic bombers and relinquished over 1,000 cruise missiles. The US assisted Ukraine in the destruction of the bomber fleet. In exchange, the US has provided security assurances to Ukraine. Obviously, that didn’t stop russia.
=================================
The “peace plan” of Trump and Vance would be a disaster for Ukraine. Instead of stopping the war and making russia pay, it would reward russia for aggression and at best “freeze” the war for several years.
Ukrainians need a real peace for generations, not a pause for a couple of years. This peace can only come when (1) russia leaves Ukraine, and (2) Ukraine becomes part of the NATO.
…………….
As the US continues to forbid Ukraine from fighting back, russia bombs cities and kills civilians.
The most common tactic used by russians is to bring airplanes close to the Ukrainian boarder and shoot missiles and throw glided bombs. When that happens, the time to react is very short, especially for guided bombs. So, people are killed. Kids, women, elderly.
The only way to stop this is to shoot down russian airplanes over the russian territories. To hit russian airfields.
Imagine if this was a policy during the World War Two, where the US told the UK to only use the supplied weaponry and aid against German forces inside Britain.
But that is exactly what is happening today, as the Biden’s administration forbids Ukraine from using western weaponry on russian territory.
Putin ready for Russian Peace keepers in occupied Donbass!
If it says Trump on the outside, it has shit on the inside.
DW Philips has just commented again on the Trumpkov-VanZkov “Piss Plan” :
“JD Vance and the art of moral equivalency.”
“Some people have convinced themselves that [Ukraine defense against Russia] this is a war of good versus evil…The truth is that Russia should not have invaded Ukraine, but the Ukrainians have a lot of corruption problems, too.” JD Vance, candidate for Vice President of USA
It’s a form of ethical legerdemain designed to distract the public in order to hide the actual shenanigans Vance advocates.
It goes like this: Putin was naughty for invading Ukraine, BUT Ukraine is corrupt. Therefore you can’t claim this is a war of right vs. wrong.
Beyond, the infantile reasoning which should have him thrown off any high school debate team in America, is the sleight of hand he is using on the issue of corruption.
When you hear people shout Ukraine is corrupt, realize you are listening to a verbal meme coming from people who know little about corruption in Ukraine, who cover for the leading corrupt nation in the world – Russia, and who gain political power on accusations of corruption in America, while holding themselves and their own country to a completely different standard.
There is also the fact that he appears to be saying – Ukraine, the victim of the greatest ongoing terrorist assaults since WWII, got what they deserved because they were corrupt.
Honest question. Does Vance actually believe Ukraine is more corrupt than the USA?
His presidential platform and that of his friends like Tucker Carlson is built on the proposition that the United States is exploding with corruption. They may have a point. So what does that mean? If the USA has systemic corruption in DC, may terrorists and foreign states wage war against us with impunity? Are attacks on our territorial integrity to be viewed as morally ambiguous because of our corruption? Should American families be unprotected because we have rascals in DC?
If Russia nukes America or merely murders hundreds of thousands and engages in widespread warcrimes against American citizens will his response be: “Naughty Putin, but America is corrupt. No clear right or wrong.”
If you “provoke” a gangster and he executes your entire family, will you say: He shouldn’t have done it, but you know he was provoked. No clear right or wrong.
If you burn the house of a neighbor who is cheating on his taxes, will you say: Shouldn’t have burned the house down, but the guy owed the government $1000 in taxes. No clear right or wrong.
Do dog whistles about corruption suggest that Americans are no longer capable of making moral judgments when someone walks up to another person and rapes boys and girls, sets up torture chambers, kidnaps children and burns the neighborhood to the ground?
Maybe he is not reflecting on the intellectual and ethical quagmire he has created, but the implications of this gangster theology are inescapable.”
“Putin was naughty for invading Ukraine, BUT Ukraine is corrupt. Therefore you can’t claim this is a war of right vs. wrong. Beyond, the infantile reasoning which should have him thrown off any high school debate team in America, is the sleight of hand he is using on the issue of corruption.”
You can see why VanZkov got the job; his mind is as retarded, compassionless and infantile as his boss.
I agree fully. Using the corruption card is like grasping at straws, since these shit nuggets have nothing else to hold on to, to justify their support for a fascist crime syndicate. Such lame excuses suits those who use cords instead of belts to keep their soiled pants from dropping to their ankles.