Considering that Russia attacked them, I think any entitlements in the memorandum are null in their eyes. The agreement is effectively nullified. From what I’ve briefly read, the document is not forcing any party to assist Ukraine, beyond advocating for them at the UN security council.
I’d say the main difference here is that Ukraine probably wanted the “support” of the US. I think we did alright giving them access to money, weapons and training to defend themselves early on, and the major shortcoming was limiting the targets that they could strike with the weapons we sold. Turnabout is fair play, if Vlad wants to start throwing hands, he has to accept that he may get punched in the face.
Depends on the day and personal beliefs of the person advocating for it. So, Schroedinger’s World Police. As a USian, I would prefer the EU took over the world police job. It’s not worth the effort.
That is a very short-sighted view. The US’ role as world police allowed it to station troops all over the world, projecting power and influence in every corner of the world. Every deal any country in the world made, always at least considered a US deal. The US was able to influence politics without actually having to flex the military muscle. They could always still do that if diplomacy didn’t work. The projection of scientific and cultural power was also part of that influence.
And why can’t the EU step up? The EU chose to let the US become the world police because they thought it would easier and cheaper. And now they are pissed about it.
The EU is legitimately currently trying to be the region police (not world police) as we speak. Part of that involves building up our own military industry. The US government is not happy about that, to put it mildly.
“Currently trying”. Well, that only took several generations to pull their collective heads out of their asses. Imagine what that industrial/military complex is going to eventually cost EU citizens. Once you get on that particular horse, it’s hard to get off.
They did not choose to. The EU wasn’t even a thing when the USA became the de facto world police.
And after WW2 the USA was so dominant that any such attempt by Europes stronger countries would have been in vain
Then it’s simple. The US should help Ukraine. They’re being invaded and are asking for help. For the “pragmatists”, any nation what helps Ukraine with have an easier time doing business with them afterwards.
Ukrainians repeatedly asked to close the sky, which is de-facto a sort of direct help. Also talks about NATO troops being stationed on the West part. Still no balls.
Second paragraph - only after 2022. Ukraine was denied even buying Western equipment in 2014. Obama is an asshole.
I do not believe that Russia has working nukes and I bet most nation’s intelligence don’t believe they do either, but no one wants bet on that.
Also, I believe we’re already in WWIII. At least at some point in the future, the start of it will be retroactively decided to have happened before now.
I do not believe that Russia has working nukes and I bet most nation’s intelligence don’t believe they do either, but no one wants bet on that.
That’s a huge stretch. Working ICBMs are 1960s tech’. Russia has repeatedly demonstrated they’re perfectly capable of employing 1960s tech’ reliably enough to function sometimes.
It doesn’t take a 2026 nuke to hit a country in 2026. The more modern, the more likely it hits, but they have so many.
Also, I believe we’re already in WWIII. At least at some point in the future, the start of it will be retroactively decided to have happened before now.
You’re being pedantic about the term WWIII. We both know what I meant.
Nukes don’t store forever. They require more upkeep then other types of military equipment and Russia has proven to be lacking by their initial invasion. Keen eyes noticed that the trucks they were using were sitting for years by the dryrot wear on the tires.
I’m no nuclear expert but I do dabble in statistics, and you’re making an argument for “the majority of the Russian stockpile will be too decrepit to function,” not an argument for “all of the Russian stockpile will be too decrepit to function.”
All it takes is one to kill millions. That’s the scenario The West is desperately trying to avoid at any cost.
I don’t know why you’re doing mental gymnastics to deny either above point, but it’s getting exhausting trying to keep up with you.
I mean you could replace the Stars and Stripes here with French Tricolour or Union Jack and I still think it works.
The point is more that the lukewarm response to the Crimean invasion emboldened Russia into attacking mainland Ukraine.
Maybe it’s a filter of my English-speaking internet circles, but I’ve never seen memes like this about France or the UK. So you could replace the flags… The point is that it doesn’t seem to happen.
The trick is to have a US-controlled strategic interest there. See Syria, Russians attack a US-defended oilfield, Russia denies they are Russian regulars, US turn 200 of them into moist ash with artillery and JDAMs
We’re not supposed to. But in the instance of Ukraine, we signed a treaty with Ukraine, Russia and ourselves that if Ukraine dismantled their nuclear weapons that the US would defend Ukraine if Russia invaded. And Russia would defend Ukraine if US invaded.
but i guess international law is nonexistant and nobody gives a damn if a country makes a promise
This was already address in another thread. Short summary…
It’s not a treaty, but a memorandum, it really only “mandates” that we will support them in the UN security council, it’s not enforceable, and Russia already shit all over it.
This is pretty much the dilemma the US government faces. On the one hand, the public doesn’t like intervention. On the other, they can totally do it, and in many cases it will save a lot of lives, or at least seems like it will.
The new MAGA school is basically to disregard the humanity of anyone who’s not a (white) American citizen, which solves it neatly. At great cost in terms of basic morality, of course. The other one was neoconservativism, where you’re openly the world police. Theoretically, unilaterally disarming is also an option, but almost nobody is talking about that.
The Democrats, and blue Americans in general, have yet to pick a lane.
The US and other countries not protecting Ukraine sends a massive signal to everyone else that you can only depend on yourself for protection, and that means everyone needs to have WMDs. So take that how you will.
So…
Is the US supposed to be the world police or not?
Budapest memorandum entitles Ukraine to assistance in this case.
Considering that Russia attacked them, I think any entitlements in the memorandum are null in their eyes. The agreement is effectively nullified. From what I’ve briefly read, the document is not forcing any party to assist Ukraine, beyond advocating for them at the UN security council.
I’d say the main difference here is that Ukraine probably wanted the “support” of the US. I think we did alright giving them access to money, weapons and training to defend themselves early on, and the major shortcoming was limiting the targets that they could strike with the weapons we sold. Turnabout is fair play, if Vlad wants to start throwing hands, he has to accept that he may get punched in the face.
No it does not. Not even a little bit.
The Budapest memorandum A) isn’t even a binding treaty. And B) only guarantees assurances from the US, UK, and Russia that they won’t invade Ukraine.
There are absolutely ZERO provisions for the US giving military defense to Ukraine in the event they are invaded.
The US and UK have upheld that. Neither have ever invaded Ukraine.
Depends on the day and personal beliefs of the person advocating for it. So, Schroedinger’s World Police. As a USian, I would prefer the EU took over the world police job. It’s not worth the effort.
That is a very short-sighted view. The US’ role as world police allowed it to station troops all over the world, projecting power and influence in every corner of the world. Every deal any country in the world made, always at least considered a US deal. The US was able to influence politics without actually having to flex the military muscle. They could always still do that if diplomacy didn’t work. The projection of scientific and cultural power was also part of that influence.
And why can’t the EU step up? The EU chose to let the US become the world police because they thought it would easier and cheaper. And now they are pissed about it.
The EU is legitimately currently trying to be the region police (not world police) as we speak. Part of that involves building up our own military industry. The US government is not happy about that, to put it mildly.
“Currently trying”. Well, that only took several generations to pull their collective heads out of their asses. Imagine what that industrial/military complex is going to eventually cost EU citizens. Once you get on that particular horse, it’s hard to get off.
They did not choose to. The EU wasn’t even a thing when the USA became the de facto world police. And after WW2 the USA was so dominant that any such attempt by Europes stronger countries would have been in vain
Did Ukraine ask for help?
yes
Then it’s simple. The US should help Ukraine. They’re being invaded and are asking for help. For the “pragmatists”, any nation what helps Ukraine with have an easier time doing business with them afterwards.
The US has.
Ukraine has explicitly NOT asked for direct military assistance. They have not asked for troops or US airstrikes.
They have asked for weapons, logistics, intelligence, and ammunition. All of which have been provided by the US and European NATO nations.
Ukrainians repeatedly asked to close the sky, which is de-facto a sort of direct help. Also talks about NATO troops being stationed on the West part. Still no balls.
Second paragraph - only after 2022. Ukraine was denied even buying Western equipment in 2014. Obama is an asshole.
It’s basically Chamberlain++.
Chamberlain’s appeasement for fear of kicking off WWII was bad enough, but now nuclear missiles are on the table, so there’s much more fear.
There’s never a good time to kick off WWIII, so most nations are going to bend over backward to not do so.
I do not believe that Russia has working nukes and I bet most nation’s intelligence don’t believe they do either, but no one wants bet on that.
Also, I believe we’re already in WWIII. At least at some point in the future, the start of it will be retroactively decided to have happened before now.
That’s a huge stretch. Working ICBMs are 1960s tech’. Russia has repeatedly demonstrated they’re perfectly capable of employing 1960s tech’ reliably enough to function sometimes.
It doesn’t take a 2026 nuke to hit a country in 2026. The more modern, the more likely it hits, but they have so many.
You’re being pedantic about the term WWIII. We both know what I meant.
Nukes don’t store forever. They require more upkeep then other types of military equipment and Russia has proven to be lacking by their initial invasion. Keen eyes noticed that the trucks they were using were sitting for years by the dryrot wear on the tires.
I’m no nuclear expert but I do dabble in statistics, and you’re making an argument for “the majority of the Russian stockpile will be too decrepit to function,” not an argument for “all of the Russian stockpile will be too decrepit to function.”
All it takes is one to kill millions. That’s the scenario The West is desperately trying to avoid at any cost.
I don’t know why you’re doing mental gymnastics to deny either above point, but it’s getting exhausting trying to keep up with you.
I mean you could replace the Stars and Stripes here with French Tricolour or Union Jack and I still think it works. The point is more that the lukewarm response to the Crimean invasion emboldened Russia into attacking mainland Ukraine.
Maybe it’s a filter of my English-speaking internet circles, but I’ve never seen memes like this about France or the UK. So you could replace the flags… The point is that it doesn’t seem to happen.
The trick is to have a US-controlled strategic interest there. See Syria, Russians attack a US-defended oilfield, Russia denies they are Russian regulars, US turn 200 of them into moist ash with artillery and JDAMs
We’re not supposed to. But in the instance of Ukraine, we signed a treaty with Ukraine, Russia and ourselves that if Ukraine dismantled their nuclear weapons that the US would defend Ukraine if Russia invaded. And Russia would defend Ukraine if US invaded.
but i guess international law is nonexistant and nobody gives a damn if a country makes a promise
This was already address in another thread. Short summary…
It’s not a treaty, but a memorandum, it really only “mandates” that we will support them in the UN security council, it’s not enforceable, and Russia already shit all over it.
This also ignores that the US has intervened aggressively, just in its usual fashion of profitable arms sales and supporting fascist militias.
This is pretty much the dilemma the US government faces. On the one hand, the public doesn’t like intervention. On the other, they can totally do it, and in many cases it will save a lot of lives, or at least seems like it will.
The new MAGA school is basically to disregard the humanity of anyone who’s not a (white) American citizen, which solves it neatly. At great cost in terms of basic morality, of course. The other one was neoconservativism, where you’re openly the world police. Theoretically, unilaterally disarming is also an option, but almost nobody is talking about that.
The Democrats, and blue Americans in general, have yet to pick a lane.
The US and other countries not protecting Ukraine sends a massive signal to everyone else that you can only depend on yourself for protection, and that means everyone needs to have WMDs. So take that how you will.
So the US should be the world police.