Western leaders must decide whether they are finally prepared to arm Ukraine adequately or face the consequences of a Russian victory which would lead to genocide in the heart of Europe, writes Taras Kuzio.
There’s such a thing as defensive weapons. Patriot missiles being the main one. The Baltic nations around Ukraine that have been giving them money and weapons are some of the poorest nations and they give what they can. Obviously countries shouldn’t bankrupt themselves for Ukraine, but giving can be done in other ways. If a country is really against sending arms they could send medical aid, monetary aid, and building/electrical grid aid. Countries giving nothing at all are enabling Putin and/or giving in to the idea of complacency like Russia wants.
We (the US) are enabling the genocide of the Uyghur people… outside of a few political stunts of “blocking” exports from those areas by purchasing from China and giving money to their government, thereby funding them, and turning a mostly blind eye to the genocide we’re helping at worst and enabling at best. It’s not really complex unless you make it complex.
Watching Ukraine get their land and people stolen from them and doing absolutely nothing is helping.
I didn’t say people had to give guns, I said they had to provide aid. That can come in many forms.
I’m not saying you did. I’m agreeing with you on aid.
I’m saying the title of the post is unhelpful. It is not a dichotomy of guns or you’re with Putin.
I’m saying talking in such terms is unhelpful for establishing dialogue. I genuinely did not expect this to be controversial or difficult.
It’s a bad title. It’s a bad argument and if we want to help Ukraine, we should do everything in our power to elevate good faith discussions and arguments.
I agree about the Uyghurs and any trading partner with China sharing culpability. The point is that guns aren’t the solution there and even for Ukraine, for some nations, guns are not the best path forward for a variety of reasons.
I think NATO nations have a huge responsibility to step up and I’m frustrated with the US’s foot dragging on this issue, especially when there seems to be unlimited funds for Israel to bomb Palestinians.
There’s such a thing as defensive weapons. Patriot missiles being the main one. The Baltic nations around Ukraine that have been giving them money and weapons are some of the poorest nations and they give what they can. Obviously countries shouldn’t bankrupt themselves for Ukraine, but giving can be done in other ways. If a country is really against sending arms they could send medical aid, monetary aid, and building/electrical grid aid. Countries giving nothing at all are enabling Putin and/or giving in to the idea of complacency like Russia wants.
I completely agree. I’m all for sending aid, but I’m saying that not sending weapons is not the equivalent of aiding Putin’s genocide.
I think it creates an unhelpful moral landscape.
I think the world has a global responsibility to stop genocide and aggression in all its forms, but that doesn’t always mean sending weapons.
We can’t arm the Uyghurs in China, but that doesn’t mean we’re enabling China’s genocide.
There are many levers that can and should be pulled as are appropriate to a nations position, power and wealth.
Saying give guns or you’re aiding genocide is an unhelpful foundation for respectful collaboration and is bad rhetoric.
We (the US) are enabling the genocide of the Uyghur people… outside of a few political stunts of “blocking” exports from those areas by purchasing from China and giving money to their government, thereby funding them, and turning a mostly blind eye to the genocide we’re helping at worst and enabling at best. It’s not really complex unless you make it complex.
Watching Ukraine get their land and people stolen from them and doing absolutely nothing is helping.
I didn’t say people had to give guns, I said they had to provide aid. That can come in many forms.
I’m not saying you did. I’m agreeing with you on aid.
I’m saying the title of the post is unhelpful. It is not a dichotomy of guns or you’re with Putin.
I’m saying talking in such terms is unhelpful for establishing dialogue. I genuinely did not expect this to be controversial or difficult.
It’s a bad title. It’s a bad argument and if we want to help Ukraine, we should do everything in our power to elevate good faith discussions and arguments.
I agree about the Uyghurs and any trading partner with China sharing culpability. The point is that guns aren’t the solution there and even for Ukraine, for some nations, guns are not the best path forward for a variety of reasons.
I think NATO nations have a huge responsibility to step up and I’m frustrated with the US’s foot dragging on this issue, especially when there seems to be unlimited funds for Israel to bomb Palestinians.