Russia vs. Ukraine: the time for diplomacy, sanctions are over edition

I've heard too many arguments against giving Ukraine the weaponry they need to win. This morning, for instance, while Lisa Boothe guest-hosted on Fox & Friends, she argued against sending more money and arms to Ukraine. She worried whether the war was winnable. (It is.) Piers Morgan stated that the war was winnable.

It's time to dust off a pair of successful GOP battle plans. First and most important, it's time to dust off the Powell Doctrine. In a nutshell, the Powell Doctrine, named after then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Collin Powell, asks whether a "vital national security interest" had been threatened, whether "a clear and attainable objective" existed and whether "a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement" exists. The answer to each of those questions is emphatically yes.

The other battle plan is more of a mindset. When asked what his strategy was towards the Soviets, President Reagan said "Simple. We win. They lose." When Reagan spoke of the USSR as the evil empire, he framed that fight as a battle between the forces of evil (Soviets) and the forces of righteousness (U.S.A.) It's time to pitch the Trump Doctrine of partnering with Russia. I'm not interested in that. I'd rather tear their heads off.

First, here's the video of the debate debate between Lisa Boothe on one side and Brian Kilmeade and Piers Morgan on the other side:

When Miss Boothe asked "Is this a war we want our children to fight in?", Kilmeade and Morgan emphatically replied "We don't have to." Morgan had just said that he'd visited Ukraine. He stated passionately that "When you speak to them, the fire inside them to repel the Russians -- this is not just an attack against Ukraine but on freedom, democracy and a sovereign country..." The Russians aren't 10 feet tall and 2% body fat. They aren't well-equipped and well-trained with the best weaponry. Had this war been fought by Russia against a well-armed nation like Israel, it might've been like the 6-Day War 2.0. It wouldn't have been a fair fight. Russia would've gotten their butts kicked fast.

Putin can't accept a true negotiated peace. He'd be dead within a week. It's that simple. The option that hasn't been seriously explored is to give Ukraine what it needs on an expedited basis (the Powell Doctrine) so they can push all Russian troops out of Ukraine (the Reagan Doctrine -- we win, they lose.), including out of the Donbas and Crimea. At that point, who cares if there's a negotiated peace? Let's forget about fighting endless wars. Let's help our allies defeat our enemies without the U.S. putting a boot on the ground. That isn't always possible but it is this time. Let's seize the day -- immediately.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tim Walz's Confederate Flag Fiasco

Image
After Minnesota's Democrats shoved the most controversial progressive legislation down Minnesotans' throats, gossip started popping up about Gov. Walz being interested in running for president . That's died off but Gov. Walz is still making headlines, this time for all the wrong reasons. First, Gov. Walz isn't the brightest bulb in the chandelier. Still, Gov. Walz is fighting against Minnesota's history. This Alpha News article quotes David Hann, the chairman of Minnesota's Republican Party, as saying " The flag the DFL has eliminated was a version of the historic flag our regiments fought under during the Civil War. Minnesota was the first state to offer troops to the Union cause in 1861 , beginning a long tradition of leading the nation in confronting injustice. The DFL quest to erase our history is repugnant and should be rejected." Gov. Walz, though, sees things differently. He's quoted as saying "Minnesota is a diverse state, it continue
Read more

What is Kamala Harris afraid of?

Image
Apparently, Kamala Harris suddenly loves debating. Let me rephrase that. Harris loves debating as long as the moderators are partisan hacks. She wants nothing to do with a debate moderated by Fox's Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum. She's afraid of Bret and Martha because a) they'll either fact-check both her and Trump or they won't fact-check either of them and b) Bret and Martha aren't afraid of asking follow-up questions. To a candidate whose answers are scripted and who isn't quick on her feet, the last thing you want is a follow-up question. Kamala fears follow-up questions like vampires hate wooden stakes, sunlight and holy water. Why has Kamala Harris avoided Fox News like the plague? The moderators/propagandists fact-checked Donald Trump aggressively but didn't fact-check Harris . Why didn't David Muir and Linsey Davis fact-check both candidates equally? Is it because Harris doesn't like fair fights? Perhaps she's just afraid of getting exp
Read more

Why is Joe Biden letting Hamas off the hook?

Image
It isn't disputable whether Joe Biden's administration is letting Hamas off the hook. That issue was settled months ago, when a spineless Joe Biden caved to activists interested in saving Hamas and thwarting the Israelis' attempt to defend themselves. Gerard Baker's op-ed highlights what's at stake for the U.S. if the terrorists are permitted to survive. In his op-ed, Baker wrote "If, under the pressure of internal Democratic politics and global public opinion, the Biden administration forces a 'cease-fire' that leaves our closest ally in the region short of victory over an enemy that seeks to destroy it, sooner or later we shall all pay the price." It's time to revisit George W. Bush's speech to a joint session of Congress on Sept. 20, 2001. It's required that we remind ourselves of one of its most important paragraphs. In talking about who committed the atrocities of 9/11, President Bush identified al-Qa'ida as "a collectio
Read more