It’s hard to believe one can be such a cynical, dishonest person:
Russia has been conducting an invasion of Ukraine for eleven years. In Mariupol alone, a hundred thousand civilians were murdered during a two-month siege. And this little bitch completely denies that this happened to make some utterly stupid, partisan point.
I’ve seen this point made about a trillion times since yesterday. “So if Putin tries to kidnap Zelensky, that would be fine?” He did, you stupid bastards. He did many times. He failed. It’s OK not to know but then maybe use the material you are familiar with to make your points. Putin has believed that it’s very much OK to do it long before Trump sent troops into Caracas. It ain’t Trump who opened that can of worms. All Trump did is avoid killing civilians in the process. Which, to me, is a massive improvement but maybe I’m just being sentimental.
The reason why the US has been funding Ukraine’s war efforts isn’t because Russia is vaguely bad and Ukraine is vaguely good. And it isn’t because of some utterly invented international law. But simply because the US signed an agreement to do so in case of Russia’s aggression and in exchange for Ukraine giving up its nukes. If that agreement hadn’t been signed, there would be neither a war in Ukraine nor a country called Lithuania right now. But that’s a different issue.
Clarissa's Blog 
This is why I don’t read The Atlantic. They are really dumb over there.
Russia wishes it could have done what the US just did in Venezuela. Russia tried and failed miserably, and their three day operation has turned into a four year nightmare. A great power does what the US did to Iraq, utterly destroy their military in a couple of weeks, or just walk in and grab Maduro. Russia cannot do any of those, it has failed miserably and will not recover from their disaster in Ukraine. They are done.
China has not fought a real war, let alone a naval battle of historical proportions in many decades, if ever. Their population is also collapsing and their one-child policy means they are disappearing at an alarming rate.
These are the countries we’re so afraid of giving a free hand?
LikeLike
“All Trump did is avoid killing civilians in the process. “
That is what he claims however there are reports that there were civilians killed among the 80 or more dead in the capture effort. There were no US military deaths and no equipment lost – interesting that he mentioned equipment.
LikeLike
You can’t berate leftists on here day and night for engaging in their delusions about international norms, human rights, and international rules-based order and simultaneously hold the opinion that “agreements” mean anything. Where can this contract be enforced? The Hague? It’s cute. “But americans signed a piece of paper!!”
Kidnapping the president of a sovereign nation? “Fuck international laws”
Reneging on an agreement? “Nooooo, you’re duty-bound toobey this treaty. After all, you signed it! On paper! With real ink!”
LikeLike
This isn’t about ink but about the goals of nuclear non-proliferation. Is the world more comfortable for all of us if every one of the 200 countries on the planet has nukes? The consistent position of the US has been that no, that’s not a great idea. The future where every Congo and Lesotho can lob a nuke at a neighbor is not a great one.
This is where the Budapest Memorandum will be enforced. In a future where there’s nothing anybody can offer as an argument against 200 (and growing) nuclear arsenals in the hands of every possible savage.
And Maduro wasn’t a president. The actual Venezuelan president is in Spain, or was until recently.
LikeLike
This dodges the point. If agreements only matter when they’re useful, then citing the budapest memorandum as some binding precedent doesn’t really work. You can’t treat international law and treaties as fake or naive when they limit the US from kidnapping presidents, but sacred obligations when it comes to supporting Ukraine in the war.
I’m not making any judgement on whether US should or should not support Ukraine. I’m just saying you can’t justify that support by suddenly appealing to the sanctity of a “contract” when you routinely mock other people for believing in similar ideas. Either international agreements are a joke or they aren’t.
LikeLike
Maduro wasn’t recognized as president of Venezuela, so it’s not correct to say that an agreement with him was broken. The US has for years rejected his claim to be a legitimate leader of the country.
This is a false analogy.
LikeLike
Nitpicking. So all it takes to kidnap a president is to first file the proper paperwork saying “we don’t recognize.” Got it.
LikeLike
Pretty sure it had something to do with emptying their prisons across our border, interfering in our elections, training our commie activists, violating oil embargoes, and drug smuggling?
I’m not saying it’s a good thing (waiting to see how it turns out, tbh). But it’s hardly a case of “they just mindin’ they own bidness”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
–way more concerned about apparent Iran action going on RN. That seems ominous.
LikeLike
“The weren’t minding their business” is a hilariously low bar for intervention. If that’s the standard every country could justify actions dozens of states at any given time. Does USAID training commies/atheists in foreign countries through NGOs justify violence against america?
LikeLike
Yeah.
LikeLike
“Does USAID training commies/atheists in foreign countries through NGOs justify violence against america”
It certainly warrants action against said NGOs. Why do so few countries throw them out? Money? Interestingly, Israel is one of the small handful of countries that’ve put restrictions on them.
“Justification” is one of those terms like “fairness”: squishy. Who is the authority one is being justified to? Oneself? Voters? Posterity? God? Muslim terrorists never seem short on justifications for attacking the US. Most in the US do not agree with the logic. Regardless of whether violence against America is ‘justified’, whatever that consists of, it certainly isn’t wise or strategic, and I’m glad of that.
It’s silly to act like Venezuela was just some innocent passerby getting clubbed on the beach like a cute baby seal for *no reason at all*, whether you support US military action there or not. IMO we had a helluva lot more reason to strike VEN than, say, Libya. Was it a good idea? We’ll know in five years.
LikeLike
What does it feel like, boxing against the shadows of your own imagination? Nobody’s claiming this. You’re repeating arguments that have already been addressed.
LikeLike
You are saying an agreement was broken. What agreement was it? Who agreed to what? There was a very widespread international agreement that Maduro was not a president.
LikeLike
Wait, so every country now needs an agreement with america to ensure their president doesn’t get kidnapped? And absence such an agreement, they’re fair game?
“Who agreed to not getting kidnapped? Show me the papers!” LOL
LikeLike
It’s not like this is a new thing. If nobody recognizes you as the representative of your country, then you aren’t one. That’s why every authoritarian regime still holds elections, fraudulent as they might be.
LikeLike