Right when she said she had been based in Moscow I started to not take her seriously. Putin's nuclear threats happen and have happened every day since 2014. It's all a bluff. Nobody wants to launch nuclear weapons and nobody will.
Maybe Ukraine should be making these decisions and not the US. It should be up to the Ukrainian people what they are willing to fight for and what they are willing to give up
@@h.f.4095What is the point of alliances? Mutual protection and mutual interest or manipulating smaller countries to do our will? Alliances are there for the moments when the going gets tough, not there to walk away from them the going gets tough.
Everything you say can be said to be correct. But if the US military can’t win any war, and if our weapons don’t work on the modern battlefield, and if we aren’t willing to stand behind any commitment or support any friend when the chips are down - do we really need this huge military and intelligence and diplomatic apparatus? People talk about getting rid of ineffective government programs, and I gotta say, the military isn’t looking very effective right now. You won’t get lower hanging fruit than helping Ukraine fight off an unprovoked invasion.
If it was a NATO ally or Japan/SK this conversation wouldn't be happening. Ukraine is not a friend, they are just a tool to hurt Russians, and its understandable not everyone is comfortable with the foreign policy decision to make them such.
The people pushing for isolationism should be viewed with great suspicion. China, Russia, and Iran would love the US to leave a vacuum on the international stage so that they can step in and take power. They play on the selfishness, greed, and ignorance of the US population so that they give up their long held advantages for tiny amounts of short term profit.
This idea we have an oversized military is ridiculous. Look at military spending proportional to GDP. We spend about as much as Greece and less than Poland. Total cost is a dumb way to look at it.
"We cannot afford to be in war with Russia, and so when they threaten us, we will give them Alaska" If your are that chicken, then close the DoD and open the "department of US partitioning". This interview is incohenrent and shows lack of understanding. Ask Ben Hodges and Bill Browder what they think of it.
Those jag off said Trump wasn’t gonna win the election and now every Ukrainian who bought in the Trump is a Putin stooge now they have to understand that the American people voted for Trump and it’s not about Ukraine that’s why Kamala Harris and Joe Biden LinkedIn putting their reputation full on the line for Ukraine.
Nobody wants to die or start world war 3 over stupid fucking Ukraine. Ukraine and Alaska are not the same at all. Do you know why? Because Alaska is American territory and therefore our problem, while Ukraine is Ukrainian territory and not our problem. Warmongering idiot
Russia won’t challenge the USA no matter what militarily. What are the interests of the United States? That is what matters for what our president should do. It isn’t about punishing or rewarding Putin as if we are the cosmic arbiters of morality and justice.
@@jordandthornburg Of course it is. There needs to be consequences for invading a sovereign country so that no one tries to pull the same shit. That is the interest of the United States and the world at large.
The contributor said she didn’t understand what the U.S. was trying to do, but then clearly articulated what the U.S. was trying to do - provide just enough weapons to keep Ukraine in the war without providing the weapons or the strike permissions for Ukraine to possibly defeat Russia. I disagree with this policy choice, but clearly the Biden administration thought that providing overwhelming arms to Ukraine so that it could defeat Russia would potentially destabilize Russia (and thus the world) and either cause Putin’s regime to fall or to prompt Russia to use nukes in an effort to stave off defeat. Russia has preferred to fight a war of attrition after the initial push on Kyiv failed and the U.S. decided to let Russia wear itself down doing so. However, that meant that the much less populous and resourced Ukrainians would also be worn down, possibly to a breaking point. To sum up, the U.S. strategy was to make this war as costly as possible for Russia but not to put Ukraine in a position to possibly win, absent some unforeseen Russian military collapse.
I would say this I fully understand where she’s coming from and I partially agree with her. The reason she feels like this, and the reason that Ukraine has suffered in the way that is suffered during this conflict is because the United States did not show real back bone or real commitment. President Biden has allowed this conflict to drag on and he’s allowed the American Congress to daughter and play games with the actual Support. This is cost hundreds maybe thousands of Ukrainian lives.. real bold leadership would’ve recognized from the beginning that Russia had no place in moving forward, which is potential attack on Ukraine the western allies if they truly cared, could’ve very easily flooded Ukraine with a standup force to stop us from happening they could do it right now if they want nobody has to see a front line has to see shots fired and anger, but we could occupy Ukraine and allow the Ukrainian army to fight war on his front lines but instead we chose not to. We chose to play a game rather than fight a war. Where I think she is completely misguided is that Russia does not intend to stop there and anytime you hear someone say we don’t want to get into a direct conflict with Russia because they’re a nuclear power., yeah well so are we. And Putin has no intention on stopping at Ukraine. How far do you let him go because he does have a plan and he’s hoping that there are plenty of people just like her who are willing to say that’s kind of deal because lives are being lost and because we don’t have a plan. As much as I can agree with the absolute truth that no plan really means no support that does not mean that we allow more lives to be lost. I also see that because of our lack of clarity and commitment. We will allow the trumpet ideas to settle in that we finally have an agent of chaos that can scare everybody because they don’t know what he’ll do. Those people I say you’re completely misguided. Everybody knows what Trump will do and if you understand chaos, you also understand what he will not do. He will not stand up against a nuclear power. You can call it the ball in the China shop ready to break all of your China, but he’s not ready to break anybody else’s China, and are you willing to put America’s interest and safety in the hands of a person who is only concerned about his standing in the eyes of the world? Regretfully most Americans are. I do not have a problem with an American president trying to see peace. I do not have a problem with an American president trying to find a way out of this chaos, but chaos plus chaos does not equal order or peace. American people are about to get what we so richly deserve. I hope I’m wrong. I’m almost praying I’m wrong but I doubt it. I want to hear these voices in a year because if I were you pregnant, I would not stop this war because a clown says he’s got a deal for me, and for my country, I fight to end my last breath and the American people told me to give up because of all the wasted lives. I would ask them if I put my gun down is my life any safer from the enemy who is trying to kill me anyway? To all you peace next out there who think that that’s the way it works have you not noticed that the Russian army is not really an army but a mob of thieves, prisoners, and murders?
I was thinking a stalemate as long as Putin lives and peace after was the best possible outcome. A Russian victory is terrible, and that's what this would be. Appeasement never stops madmen.
The problem with this is an assumption that the man to eventually follow Putin would be 'softer' than him. If anything its the opposite that should be expected, also of course the fact that a stalemate is a little trickier when there is a mismatch with the countries involved... its moreso a conflict of attrition.
@@evangelosvasiliades1204 The person following Putin would need to fight 15 other people trying to be the new power. They would not have time or resources to sustain a war in Ukraine. The troops would be redirected by each faction against each other.
@@icey8475 Well there is precisely zero examples of such a thing happening historically, but I won't deny you the right to have fantasies. If anything the war still being ongoing is something that would make a transition of power less bloody. There will absolutely be an internal power struggle, but expecting full on civil war in a country with a disengaged populace makes no sense. The military is also not that split and I'm not really sure why you expect army division commanders to suddenly start duking it out with their troops instead of behind closed doors, let alone in service of oligarchs outside of the military.
@@evangelosvasiliades1204 sure lol. There has never been a scramble for power except the fall of the Qing dynasty, the mujahideen, the Russian Civil War, the assassination of Julius Caesar, Libya, Sudan. No example at all my disingenuous friend.
We in the US are already at war with Russia. We understand the risks that such a war brings. Nevertheless, this is how kinetic warfare in the 21st century needs to be conducted. If you allow your political goals to be shaped by an unrealistic fear of nuclear war, then every nation on Earth will see the value in attaining nuclear weapons. That is an unbelievably dangerous world and one that must be avoided. What this means is pushing the conventional military hard enough to secure a victory. It means pushing the other side close enough to the abyss that they realize annihilation is their only next step, and then reaching out to pull them away from that cliff edge. When you break it down, most people want to live. They want their family and friends to live. Nuclear war makes that absolutely impossible. Only by pushing right to the edge does that proposition become clear to everyone. Given the choice, most of the citizens in Russia would prefer not to fight a nuclear war. However, only a hard-fought conventional war can create the necessary mental clarity that makes capitulation politically acceptable. We saw this during the Cuban Missile Crisis, and the parallels could not be more evident. The US and Europe have no designs on Russian territory, but Russia has strong motivations to take Ukraine, just as they had strong motivations to put nuclear missiles into Cuba. Only when pushed to the edge of the abyss did their folly become clear to them. That is why we must continue to support Ukraine and push the Russian leadership back to the edge of oblivion.
Are you ready to offer yourself up to enlist in this conventional war? Do you think American men are eager to enlist to go have their heads blown off for a country other than their own country?
@@Indrid__Cold Reality is the beggar Ukraine lost land and a failed state and Trump won. Go dream about what you want. This happens if you be a puppet of the USA.
If we don't think Ukraine can win this war then why did we sign up to defend the mich smaller Baltic nations? Efforts to supply them would be far more involved a d exhaustive.
If by “inevitable ending” you mean “full territorial sovereignty and military security guarantees for Ukraine”, then yes, the US should work for that outcome.
Without security guarantees for Ukraine, Russia will consolidate and take another bite at the apple years from now. That's why Ukraine can't afford to give up the fight. The only way the Korean war stalemated was because of security guarantees. Otherwise, that war would still be raging today.
@@amera35 Reality is that Russia has no interest in peace. By giving them space to breath you are allowing them to recover and push for more, chipping away at Europe and giving China permission to do the same.
Trump couldn't end a bar fight.....anyone who thinks he can help the situation needs counseling. "I will end the war in 24 hours" = "I will build a wall and make Mexico pay". Ukraine will end the war, and do it on their terms......and the world will appreciate they ended Putin's threat to democracy.
@@zuzanazuscinova5209 Ukraine is spending about 30% of its budget on the war, and is providing the military to fight, same as the allies did in WW2 before the USA entered the war. The reason the world had 70 years of relative peace is because democracies joined forces to stop fascist invaders when needed......democracy is NOT free, as many MAGAs believe.
Since we have leverage as a nation because they depend on us, he absolutely could negotiate a deal for peace that ends the war. If and when he does this, will you come back and admit you were wrong?
@@jordandthornburg Absolutely....But I seriously doubt I'll need to. DJT's massive ego tells him he has capabilities far beyond what is realistic, e.g., "the wall promise". I suspect Trump may try to pressure Zelensky into conceding territory to Russia in exchange for peace, a proposal that Ukraine and NATO allies will reject. History tells us you cannot give a fascist anything and expect them to end their aggression. They must have all or nothing.
The poor Ukranians -- we are giving them enough not to lose, but not enough to win. What is US strategy? This is so tragic. Post-Soviet NATO expansion was wrong. Lots of hate in these comments, but she's right, are we willing WW3 over this conflict?
“What we are trying to achieve” is to keep the war IN Ukraine. To stop Russia there, instead of at Poland or the Baltic states. To keep Russian foreign policy and economy completely hamstrung for however long it takes until they withdraw. Afghanistan X20
If Russia is incapable of finishing the war in Ukraine, they're in no position to attack NATO. Not even close. Russia's confidence in it's own military has been significantly curtailed over the course of the war. Peace will turn them inward rather than outward for a generation.
This opinion is extremely naive. Putin has spoken for many years about his concept of "Russkiy Mir" (Russian World), by which he means a pan-Slavic empire that rightfully belongs to Russia, including Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, parts of Kazakhstan and the Baltic states. It also includes a sphere of influence over neighboring countries as well. What Ms. Stack seems to be assuming here, is that Trump is going to convince Putin from walking away from this vision, and his self-identity as a Russian leader in the same caliber as Peter the Great. That is wishful thinking. The danger here is that Trump negotiates a short-sighted cease fire that merely gives Russia time enough to rearm itself before it invades again in a few years.
So justice looking guy. What happened to US officials after Iraq invasion? Ukraine and U.S. lost and Russia took enough land and Putin stays where he is. Paper tiger US is smaller than dictate to Russia what to do.
Aleksandr Dugin said 'Russian Empire from Dublin to Vladivostok.' Keep that in mind; that is their end game. This is a fight for all of Europe and unfortunately Ukraine was the first target and is bearing the brunt of it. We are well within a new Cold War at this point, and maybe even a hot war. It's for real and we need to stop pretending that it isn't.
The problem with this opinion is that it doesn't account for what Russia really wants. Putin wants the return of the Soviet Union / Empire. There is no end to the aggression so we really should be giving Ukraine unfettered support. And it should be up to the Ukrainians how far to push this conflict. From a US perspective there is no downside to supporting Ukraine as it heavily degrades the Russian military.
People "spending some time in Rus" and claiming expertise on Ua by "spending childhood summers in Odesa"(like your, NYT, editor Yana Dluga) or this expert😂 having students coming from UA.... Such a shame. Good to see some conscious commentators, thank you
There is an alternative to the other 2 paths you have described> The Soviet Union was a vast vast storehouse of weapons which needed to be bled. one way or another/
Nothing inevitable about it. The US and western Europe each have thousands of times the real productive capacity that Russia has. (The vast majority of Russia's GDP is extractive, not productive.) If we gave even the slightest weight to our own national interests, we would force Russia to unconditional surrender. We could do so without even inconveniencing ourselves. Anyone who thinks about it knows what we have to do, and it's pretty close to what we've been doing. Russia has an end-of-the-world nuclear arsenal. The problem with such an arsenal is that it's completely useless for anything except (1) causing the end of the world, or (2) threatening to cause the end of the world. The threats can also be broken down into two categories: nuclear blackmail, and nuclear deterrence. Nuclear blackmail is the option that Putin has chosen, laying down phony red lines all over the place, that can easily be crossed. It's vulnerable to a boil-the-frog strategy. If a blackmailer's adversary pushes too hard, the blackmailer will switch to a deterrence strategy, locking in all the gains they've gotten from the blackmail approach.
Amzing how a country with no industry and a 2 trillion gas based gdp has basicly transformed the 30 trillion us global superpower into it's btch just with a couple of millions invested in trolls and a couple of words, ahahaha, god america is stupid, ahahhahaha, skers
David was a bad king. He raised his children to be monsters, he had his own comrade killed so he could sleep with his wife, one of David’s sons forced himself on his own sister, his other child tried to overthrow him before getting caught in some shrubbery. David’s kingdom collapsed and split apart only two generations after his rule. David was a bad king of Israel if we’re going by what is said about him in the Bible.
Does this person have any experience at all? Zero intelligence here. I hope the NYT increases its publication standard so as to prevent such idiotic pieces from being published. A 5th grader could have said the same things.
This is the most ridiculous podcast I have ever heard- & I’m 70, retired, & listen to podcasts ALL day while doing my chores & hobbies. Very disappointed in this NYT opinion piece. Very short sighted view, imho.
The US and EU can create clarity and they are not. Clarity is what is needed. But clarity does not mean to give Russia any and everything. It means to identify a just peace, that does treat the pro-Russians as human beings. While at the same time giving the rest of Ukraine a clear future in EU and NATO. And doing all of this in such a way that both Russia and Ukraine know that it's by far the best deal they can get.
"Nevertheless, I believe it is fair to say that Ukraine is losing the war." Spoken exactly like someone who hasn't been watching Ukraine hand Russia's ass to it over the past several years. Seriously, where do all these Russia-sympathizers come from?
I wouldn't say Ukraine is losing.. it's not just about incremental losses of land. "We don't have a clear idea of what we are trying to achieve".... well Ukraine certainly does.
Yiou are a woman, looking at the situation as a woman looks at things. I don't deny your voice, I just want you to be aware of what is shaping and moving you to say these things in a wondering, open ended way, like drifting on a river on a Sunday afternoon. All the time is there or not there. President Putin is a very clever man, not a woman. He thinks in clearl objects that he wants to hold and manipulate. Dreams don't concern him.
![BOWKYLION - วิงวอน (ex-change) [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/cLdnZWDaO-w/mqdefault.jpg)
Bad take, NYT. Shame on you.
Right when she said she had been based in Moscow I started to not take her seriously. Putin's nuclear threats happen and have happened every day since 2014. It's all a bluff. Nobody wants to launch nuclear weapons and nobody will.
She sounds like u asked sum rando at the gym about Ukraine
Purely vibes based foreign policy. I can respect it. But it's pretty dumb.
Women's voices, my friend
Agreed
Peace through strength
Wow, very thoughtful counter argument. Anyways, glad Trump will end this war.
Maybe Ukraine should be making these decisions and not the US. It should be up to the Ukrainian people what they are willing to fight for and what they are willing to give up
They can make those decisions with their own money.
@@tornasukiii745 Exactly!!!
@@h.f.4095What is the point of alliances? Mutual protection and mutual interest or manipulating smaller countries to do our will? Alliances are there for the moments when the going gets tough, not there to walk away from them the going gets tough.
Ukraine has made no decision at all so far.....since 2014, wake up!
@@brianross9753 We do not have any mutual protection agreements with Ukraine.
This is one of the dumbest opinion pieces I’ve ever heard. So dumb
Yes reality is dumb to some people in the west. Ukraine lost already.
Not a very thoughtful rebuttal. Why not give one beyond “this is dumb”?
Everything you say can be said to be correct. But if the US military can’t win any war, and if our weapons don’t work on the modern battlefield, and if we aren’t willing to stand behind any commitment or support any friend when the chips are down - do we really need this huge military and intelligence and diplomatic apparatus? People talk about getting rid of ineffective government programs, and I gotta say, the military isn’t looking very effective right now. You won’t get lower hanging fruit than helping Ukraine fight off an unprovoked invasion.
The military is focused on direct conflict with China, my friend. Everything else is a sideshow.
If it was a NATO ally or Japan/SK this conversation wouldn't be happening. Ukraine is not a friend, they are just a tool to hurt Russians, and its understandable not everyone is comfortable with the foreign policy decision to make them such.
You need this huge army for only poor countries like Iraq and Afghanistan.
The people pushing for isolationism should be viewed with great suspicion. China, Russia, and Iran would love the US to leave a vacuum on the international stage so that they can step in and take power. They play on the selfishness, greed, and ignorance of the US population so that they give up their long held advantages for tiny amounts of short term profit.
This idea we have an oversized military is ridiculous.
Look at military spending proportional to GDP.
We spend about as much as Greece and less than Poland.
Total cost is a dumb way to look at it.
"We cannot afford to be in war with Russia, and so when they threaten us, we will give them Alaska"
If your are that chicken, then close the DoD and open the "department of US partitioning".
This interview is incohenrent and shows lack of understanding. Ask Ben Hodges and Bill Browder what they think of it.
Those jag off said Trump wasn’t gonna win the election and now every Ukrainian who bought in the Trump is a Putin stooge now they have to understand that the American people voted for Trump and it’s not about Ukraine that’s why Kamala Harris and Joe Biden LinkedIn putting their reputation full on the line for Ukraine.
Nobody wants to die or start world war 3 over stupid fucking Ukraine. Ukraine and Alaska are not the same at all. Do you know why? Because Alaska is American territory and therefore our problem, while Ukraine is Ukrainian territory and not our problem. Warmongering idiot
I am reminded of Neville Chamberlain' declaration of "Peace in our time" How well did that turn out again?
Man this one was bad
And not in good way.
This lady is out of it. 😂😂😂😂
She sound like a RT anchor
This person "thinks" a lot
and doesn't believe
Ukraine has sufferred enough and we should not reward Putin. Russia will not challenge the USA if we stand tall.
YES! Keep sending drones!
Everybody can challenge declining USA now especially Russia.
Russia won’t challenge the USA no matter what militarily. What are the interests of the United States? That is what matters for what our president should do. It isn’t about punishing or rewarding Putin as if we are the cosmic arbiters of morality and justice.
@@jordandthornburg Of course it is. There needs to be consequences for invading a sovereign country so that no one tries to pull the same shit. That is the interest of the United States and the world at large.
@jordandthornburg Ukraine is showing Putin his weapons are useless.
The contributor said she didn’t understand what the U.S. was trying to do, but then clearly articulated what the U.S. was trying to do - provide just enough weapons to keep Ukraine in the war without providing the weapons or the strike permissions for Ukraine to possibly defeat Russia. I disagree with this policy choice, but clearly the Biden administration thought that providing overwhelming arms to Ukraine so that it could defeat Russia would potentially destabilize Russia (and thus the world) and either cause Putin’s regime to fall or to prompt Russia to use nukes in an effort to stave off defeat.
Russia has preferred to fight a war of attrition after the initial push on Kyiv failed and the U.S. decided to let Russia wear itself down doing so. However, that meant that the much less populous and resourced Ukrainians would also be worn down, possibly to a breaking point.
To sum up, the U.S. strategy was to make this war as costly as possible for Russia but not to put Ukraine in a position to possibly win, absent some unforeseen Russian military collapse.
@@usayo of course now Trump is in office he’ll make sure that Ukraine loses outright and Russia will gain a massive strategic victory.
What kind of strategy is that???
@@zuzanazuscinova5209
Careful, though maybe misguided.
I would say this I fully understand where she’s coming from and I partially agree with her. The reason she feels like this, and the reason that Ukraine has suffered in the way that is suffered during this conflict is because the United States did not show real back bone or real commitment. President Biden has allowed this conflict to drag on and he’s allowed the American Congress to daughter and play games with the actual Support. This is cost hundreds maybe thousands of Ukrainian lives.. real bold leadership would’ve recognized from the beginning that Russia had no place in moving forward, which is potential attack on Ukraine the western allies if they truly cared, could’ve very easily flooded Ukraine with a standup force to stop us from happening they could do it right now if they want nobody has to see a front line has to see shots fired and anger, but we could occupy Ukraine and allow the Ukrainian army to fight war on his front lines but instead we chose not to. We chose to play a game rather than fight a war. Where I think she is completely misguided is that Russia does not intend to stop there and anytime you hear someone say we don’t want to get into a direct conflict with Russia because they’re a nuclear power., yeah well so are we. And Putin has no intention on stopping at Ukraine. How far do you let him go because he does have a plan and he’s hoping that there are plenty of people just like her who are willing to say that’s kind of deal because lives are being lost and because we don’t have a plan. As much as I can agree with the absolute truth that no plan really means no support that does not mean that we allow more lives to be lost. I also see that because of our lack of clarity and commitment. We will allow the trumpet ideas to settle in that we finally have an agent of chaos that can scare everybody because they don’t know what he’ll do. Those people I say you’re completely misguided. Everybody knows what Trump will do and if you understand chaos, you also understand what he will not do. He will not stand up against a nuclear power. You can call it the ball in the China shop ready to break all of your China, but he’s not ready to break anybody else’s China, and are you willing to put America’s interest and safety in the hands of a person who is only concerned about his standing in the eyes of the world? Regretfully most Americans are. I do not have a problem with an American president trying to see peace. I do not have a problem with an American president trying to find a way out of this chaos, but chaos plus chaos does not equal order or peace. American people are about to get what we so richly deserve. I hope I’m wrong. I’m almost praying I’m wrong but I doubt it. I want to hear these voices in a year because if I were you pregnant, I would not stop this war because a clown says he’s got a deal for me, and for my country, I fight to end my last breath and the American people told me to give up because of all the wasted lives. I would ask them if I put my gun down is my life any safer from the enemy who is trying to kill me anyway? To all you peace next out there who think that that’s the way it works have you not noticed that the Russian army is not really an army but a mob of thieves, prisoners, and murders?
And Koreans. Don't forget the Koreans.
This is garbage
I was thinking a stalemate as long as Putin lives and peace after was the best possible outcome. A Russian victory is terrible, and that's what this would be. Appeasement never stops madmen.
@@His.Lordship so permanent war in Ukraine? That’s the solution in your view?
The problem with this is an assumption that the man to eventually follow Putin would be 'softer' than him. If anything its the opposite that should be expected, also of course the fact that a stalemate is a little trickier when there is a mismatch with the countries involved... its moreso a conflict of attrition.
@@evangelosvasiliades1204 The person following Putin would need to fight 15 other people trying to be the new power. They would not have time or resources to sustain a war in Ukraine. The troops would be redirected by each faction against each other.
@@icey8475 Well there is precisely zero examples of such a thing happening historically, but I won't deny you the right to have fantasies. If anything the war still being ongoing is something that would make a transition of power less bloody.
There will absolutely be an internal power struggle, but expecting full on civil war in a country with a disengaged populace makes no sense. The military is also not that split and I'm not really sure why you expect army division commanders to suddenly start duking it out with their troops instead of behind closed doors, let alone in service of oligarchs outside of the military.
@@evangelosvasiliades1204 sure lol. There has never been a scramble for power except the fall of the Qing dynasty, the mujahideen, the Russian Civil War, the assassination of Julius Caesar, Libya, Sudan. No example at all my disingenuous friend.
I agree that we have supported Ukraine enough to keep the war going but not enough to win the war.
We in the US are already at war with Russia. We understand the risks that such a war brings. Nevertheless, this is how kinetic warfare in the 21st century needs to be conducted. If you allow your political goals to be shaped by an unrealistic fear of nuclear war, then every nation on Earth will see the value in attaining nuclear weapons. That is an unbelievably dangerous world and one that must be avoided.
What this means is pushing the conventional military hard enough to secure a victory. It means pushing the other side close enough to the abyss that they realize annihilation is their only next step, and then reaching out to pull them away from that cliff edge. When you break it down, most people want to live. They want their family and friends to live. Nuclear war makes that absolutely impossible. Only by pushing right to the edge does that proposition become clear to everyone.
Given the choice, most of the citizens in Russia would prefer not to fight a nuclear war. However, only a hard-fought conventional war can create the necessary mental clarity that makes capitulation politically acceptable. We saw this during the Cuban Missile Crisis, and the parallels could not be more evident.
The US and Europe have no designs on Russian territory, but Russia has strong motivations to take Ukraine, just as they had strong motivations to put nuclear missiles into Cuba. Only when pushed to the edge of the abyss did their folly become clear to them. That is why we must continue to support Ukraine and push the Russian leadership back to the edge of oblivion.
Who are you? We voted for Trump to settle down this mess. People like you who lost the election should be quiet for now.
@arak1973 Not as long as I have breath in my body. SLAVA UKRAINE!
Are you ready to offer yourself up to enlist in this conventional war? Do you think American men are eager to enlist to go have their heads blown off for a country other than their own country?
@@arak1973Hear, Hear! Glory to Ukraine!
@@Indrid__Cold Reality is the beggar Ukraine lost land and a failed state and Trump won. Go dream about what you want. This happens if you be a puppet of the USA.
If we don't think Ukraine can win this war then why did we sign up to defend the mich smaller Baltic nations? Efforts to supply them would be far more involved a d exhaustive.
don’t fret. Trump will dissolve NATO, thereby solving the problem.
If by “inevitable ending” you mean “full territorial sovereignty and military security guarantees for Ukraine”, then yes, the US should work for that outcome.
Delusional
But that isn't possible. Reality has to be confronted eventually.
Without security guarantees for Ukraine, Russia will consolidate and take another bite at the apple years from now. That's why Ukraine can't afford to give up the fight. The only way the Korean war stalemated was because of security guarantees. Otherwise, that war would still be raging today.
Lmao
@@amera35 Reality is that Russia has no interest in peace. By giving them space to breath you are allowing them to recover and push for more, chipping away at Europe and giving China permission to do the same.
Lame take.
Trump couldn't end a bar fight.....anyone who thinks he can help the situation needs counseling. "I will end the war in 24 hours" = "I will build a wall and make Mexico pay". Ukraine will end the war, and do it on their terms......and the world will appreciate they ended Putin's threat to democracy.
Their own terms but using other people's money? How does that work?
@@zuzanazuscinova5209 Ukraine is spending about 30% of its budget on the war, and is providing the military to fight, same as the allies did in WW2 before the USA entered the war. The reason the world had 70 years of relative peace is because democracies joined forces to stop fascist invaders when needed......democracy is NOT free, as many MAGAs believe.
Since we have leverage as a nation because they depend on us, he absolutely could negotiate a deal for peace that ends the war. If and when he does this,
will you come back and admit you were wrong?
@@jordandthornburg Absolutely....But I seriously doubt I'll need to. DJT's massive ego tells him he has capabilities far beyond what is realistic, e.g., "the wall promise". I suspect Trump may try to pressure Zelensky into conceding territory to Russia in exchange for peace, a proposal that Ukraine and NATO allies will reject. History tells us you cannot give a fascist anything and expect them to end their aggression. They must have all or nothing.
I unsubscribed for this, hope many do. Shame on you
I only subscribed after the election but I'm ready to unsub again
it’s just an opinion piece though, not the editorial line
The poor Ukranians -- we are giving them enough not to lose, but not enough to win. What is US strategy?
This is so tragic. Post-Soviet NATO expansion was wrong. Lots of hate in these comments, but she's right, are we willing WW3 over this conflict?
We've been in WW3 since 2014
@@kdpowers Yes, probably...
One can't listen to this nonsense
Garbo take
F trump, and his Russian boyfriend.
His owner
You the loser and Trump rules from Jan. You can go to your hole after Jan.
Stunning and brave take.
lol, another keyboard tough guy
@xiangli4383 every Trump supporter sounds miserable, abused and neglected. Every single one
“What we are trying to achieve” is to keep the war IN Ukraine. To stop Russia there, instead of at Poland or the Baltic states. To keep Russian foreign policy and economy completely hamstrung for however long it takes until they withdraw. Afghanistan X20
If Russia is incapable of finishing the war in Ukraine, they're in no position to attack NATO. Not even close. Russia's confidence in it's own military has been significantly curtailed over the course of the war. Peace will turn them inward rather than outward for a generation.
This opinion is extremely naive. Putin has spoken for many years about his concept of "Russkiy Mir" (Russian World), by which he means a pan-Slavic empire that rightfully belongs to Russia, including Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, parts of Kazakhstan and the Baltic states. It also includes a sphere of influence over neighboring countries as well. What Ms. Stack seems to be assuming here, is that Trump is going to convince Putin from walking away from this vision, and his self-identity as a Russian leader in the same caliber as Peter the Great. That is wishful thinking.
The danger here is that Trump negotiates a short-sighted cease fire that merely gives Russia time enough to rearm itself before it invades again in a few years.
Fuck that. Putin can have one of three outcomes: exile, jail, or a Ceausescu-like end.
So justice looking guy. What happened to US officials after Iraq invasion? Ukraine and U.S. lost and Russia took enough land and Putin stays where he is. Paper tiger US is smaller than dictate to Russia what to do.
Can we afford not to stand up to Putin?
SHAME SHAME SHAME on the NYTIMES
Aleksandr Dugin said 'Russian Empire from Dublin to Vladivostok.' Keep that in mind; that is their end game. This is a fight for all of Europe and unfortunately Ukraine was the first target and is bearing the brunt of it. We are well within a new Cold War at this point, and maybe even a hot war. It's for real and we need to stop pretending that it isn't.
"slava ukraini" crowd realizing that as soon as the US becomes bored with the war they will abandon it.
The problem with this opinion is that it doesn't account for what Russia really wants. Putin wants the return of the Soviet Union / Empire. There is no end to the aggression so we really should be giving Ukraine unfettered support. And it should be up to the Ukrainians how far to push this conflict. From a US perspective there is no downside to supporting Ukraine as it heavily degrades the Russian military.
Putin wants to restore Russia as a great power but the idea that he wants Central Asia and the South Caucasus back is just silly
This opinion piece is so lame it doesn't deserve a rebuttal. SMH
Trump’s amorality will soil any negotiation.
Why should Ukraine cede a single inch of their border?
People "spending some time in Rus" and claiming expertise on Ua by "spending childhood summers in Odesa"(like your, NYT, editor Yana Dluga) or this expert😂 having students coming from UA.... Such a shame. Good to see some conscious commentators, thank you
There is an alternative to the other 2 paths you have described> The Soviet Union was a vast vast storehouse of weapons which needed to be bled. one way or another/
Trash take. This would just guarantee that in 3-5 years Russia would invade again and work on taking Kyiv. This person is a clown.
NYT cosigning some bs opinions lately. I'm switching to The Economist. Much more based.
But still having Russian as Eastern Europe editor 🎉
@ColderfromBonet explain
@ColderfromBonet Arkady Ostrovsky, the Editor you're referring to, has he changed his stance?
Slava Ukraini ❤️ ❤️ ❤️
Really disgusting.
Today's episode featuring your Mom at the coffee table
Nothing inevitable about it. The US and western Europe each have thousands of times the real productive capacity that Russia has. (The vast majority of Russia's GDP is extractive, not productive.) If we gave even the slightest weight to our own national interests, we would force Russia to unconditional surrender. We could do so without even inconveniencing ourselves.
Anyone who thinks about it knows what we have to do, and it's pretty close to what we've been doing. Russia has an end-of-the-world nuclear arsenal. The problem with such an arsenal is that it's completely useless for anything except (1) causing the end of the world, or (2) threatening to cause the end of the world. The threats can also be broken down into two categories: nuclear blackmail, and nuclear deterrence. Nuclear blackmail is the option that Putin has chosen, laying down phony red lines all over the place, that can easily be crossed. It's vulnerable to a boil-the-frog strategy. If a blackmailer's adversary pushes too hard, the blackmailer will switch to a deterrence strategy, locking in all the gains they've gotten from the blackmail approach.
You got a voice made for print.
Amzing how a country with no industry and a 2 trillion gas based gdp has basicly transformed the 30 trillion us global superpower into it's btch just with a couple of millions invested in trolls and a couple of words, ahahaha, god america is stupid, ahahhahaha, skers
Good!
when putin conquers Ukraine, and he will by the looks of it, xi might want to have a go at Taiwan.
This is a Russian propaganda horseshit take
trump (and musk) has already been talking with putin for some time and they've agreed to a deal ....
Concepts of a deal, right? Ready for roll-out in two weeks, right? 😂
David the Good versus Goliath the Bad......What does the Bible tell us ?????
Keep that sling handy.
@@Tubes12AX7k Good one
David was a bad king. He raised his children to be monsters, he had his own comrade killed so he could sleep with his wife, one of David’s sons forced himself on his own sister, his other child tried to overthrow him before getting caught in some shrubbery. David’s kingdom collapsed and split apart only two generations after his rule.
David was a bad king of Israel if we’re going by what is said about him in the Bible.
Now that you have these opinions here's what to make of it: we shoukd not start world war 3, thats a bad idea.
One of the dumbest opinion pieces yet
Does this person have any experience at all? Zero intelligence here. I hope the NYT increases its publication standard so as to prevent such idiotic pieces from being published. A 5th grader could have said the same things.
This is the most ridiculous podcast I have ever heard- & I’m 70, retired, & listen to podcasts ALL day while doing my chores & hobbies. Very disappointed in this NYT opinion piece. Very short sighted view, imho.
Ill-informed, mostly
The US and EU can create clarity and they are not.
Clarity is what is needed.
But clarity does not mean to give Russia any and everything.
It means to identify a just peace, that does treat the pro-Russians as human beings.
While at the same time giving the rest of Ukraine a clear future in EU and NATO.
And doing all of this in such a way that both Russia and Ukraine know that it's by far the best deal they can get.
I am genuinely curious about why she thinks Putin would be content & peaceful once he gets Ukraine.
She thinks?
"Nevertheless, I believe it is fair to say that Ukraine is losing the war."
Spoken exactly like someone who hasn't been watching Ukraine hand Russia's ass to it over the past several years. Seriously, where do all these Russia-sympathizers come from?
The Ukrainian Army crossed into Russia and took the fight to their territory, defeat is not "inevitable".
I wouldn't say Ukraine is losing.. it's not just about incremental losses of land. "We don't have a clear idea of what we are trying to achieve".... well Ukraine certainly does.
It's almost like a bunch or moral cheerleaders said "no you go foght that war, we'll seel you the weapons!" Yes. Thats what happened.
Yes
Yiou are a woman, looking at the situation as a woman looks at things. I don't deny your voice, I just want you to be aware of what is shaping and moving you to say these things in a wondering, open ended way, like drifting on a river on a Sunday afternoon. All the time is there or not there. President Putin is a very clever man, not a woman. He thinks in clearl objects that he wants to hold and manipulate. Dreams don't concern him.
WTAF?
What ? 😂😂😂🤣🤣
Fake info, Ukraine nuclear weapons codes in were in Moscow. They had no other option but give them back.