In Reply to: Why? Because we didn't have an alliance with Ukraine posted by TheHappyBurgermeister on November 18, 2024 at 17:51:10
> Russia may be willing to settle for a chunk of Eastern Ukraine. And, for me, any settlement would make it clear that Western Ukraine, or whatever is left of Ukraine, would be a NATO protectorate buffer zone.
You want to appease them again? What message does that send to China? You aren't just fighting for Ukraine, you are also fighting to prevent China from attacking Taiwan.
A Russian promise to invade means nothing. They gave it when they asked for Ukraine's nukes. They gave it when Ukraine gave up Crimea. They also gave it to Georgia, etc.
A NATO promise to protect Ukraine means nothing. They also gave it when Ukraine gave up nukes and when they took Crimea. Russia needs Ukraine, Poland, and the Baltics to narrow the land border with the West. That's why this war is happening. It will keep happening until we give them that border or they pay a big enough penalty to stop. That's why Poland is spending more on their military than anyone else. They know they are next. So are the Baltic countries.
> And, for me, any settlement would make it clear that Western Ukraine, or whatever is left of Ukraine, would be a NATO protectorate buffer zone. Any incursion into that would be war.
How does Ukraine survive economically? They give up all of their port cities but Odessa. Poland will not allow them to truck cheap grain through their countries. Russia also takes their land that has gas, oil, and the pipelines.
BTW, Russia has/will not agree to NATO in their buffer zone.
> By your logic, why are we not sending US troops there?
We have. Quietly NATO has sent trainers, specialists, and intelligence to Ukraine. They are just not in combat roles except in the foreign legion I believe.