Irina Pogorelaya15:07, 17.03.24
Strategic Communications Coordinator John Kirby confirmed the US position that there will be no US military presence in Ukraine.
The United States has nothing against proposals from other NATO member countries to send their military to Ukraine. Each state must decide on this independently.
This was stated by Strategic Communications Coordinator John Kirby, Voice of America reports . When asked by a journalist whether the Joe Biden administration would ask other countries to stop calling for troops to be sent to Ukraine, Kirby responded in the negative.
He also noted that the United States will not object to the decision of other countries to send their military to Ukraine, emphasizing that this is “the sovereign decision of each state.
“I cannot be responsible for the decisions of other sovereign countries. I can be responsible for the decision of our sovereign country and its commander-in-chief, who made it clear that there will be no American troops on the territory of Ukraine,” Kirby emphasized.
(C)UNIAN 2024
They are at least consistent. Why send soldiers if we don’t send weapons…
President Biden *wants* to send weapons; he’s being blocked by the MAGAt Republicans in Congress. (Who are obeying the demands of trumpkov, and trumpkov hates Ukraine and loves russia.)
What a stupid statement, there already is a military presence guarding the U.S. embassy if not more. Glad to hear a green light going out to other countries if they choose to send a presence in whatever capacity that might entail, but to hold to a notion that no U.S. troops will assist in this great time of need after the slow walk/block of what Ukraine needed/needs is outrageous. Bottom line if we don’t supply what Ukraine needs to drive the rashists out of Ukraine, allied soldiers will no longer be optional, they will be mandatory.
I think it is a perfect statement.
If the White House says: “we are going to send boots on the ground”, it will be the death of the Democratic campaign.
And at the same time, it assures the European countries they have nothing against military intervention in Ukraine.
Yes, I prefer U.S. boots on the ground, but the U.S. doesn’t even allocate money for aid, let alone warfare.
^bert
It may be an unpopular opinion here, but I think that’s the right position for Biden to take. There’s an election coming up in the US, and announcing that he’s going to send troops to fight and die in Ukraine would kill his chances of being re-elected. Anyone without their head stuck up their orban knows that trumpkov getting back in office would be a disaster for Ukraine.
It’s already a disaster now with Biden. He seems to be the most powerless US president of all time. Any lousy Congress-leader obviously has more power than Biden. The war in Ukraine should have been declared a national emergency since day one, to empower the president to make important decisions without the Congress. Instead of always blaming Trump, Biden could get his ass moving and show what the said most powerful man on this planet is able and willing to do. He’s just whining and pointing fingers all the time. Bah!
Indeed, Mike, it’s hard to decide which one of those two fossils is the worst one.
I don’t think that is very hard to decide.
It is basically a choice between “not that great” and a nuclear Armageddon.
I would go for “not that great” if I were an American voter.
^bert
I would prefer one in a nursery and the other in a prison. I think you know which is what.
This lousy Congressman? It is just how the American political system works.
Yes, a speaker of the House is an extremely powerful actor in the American political system.
Biden cannot get his ass moving without money.
^bert