Should the U.S. Be Arming Ukraine Against Russia?
Scott Horton vs. Cathy Young in a live debate at PorcFest, in Lancaster, New Hampshire.
Should the U.S. give full military and political support to Ukraine in its war with Russia, short of sending troops?
That was the subject of a Soho Forum debate held on Thursday, June 23, at the Porcupine Freedom Festival, or PorcFest, in Lancaster, New Hampshire.
Cathy Young, a writer at the Bulwark and a contributing editor at Reason, is a Moscow-native who migrated to the U.S. as a teenager, argued that the U.S. government is correct to impose sanctions on Russia and to send military and economic support to Ukraine.
Scott Horton, who's the host of Antiwar Radio, argued that U.S. backing of NATO provoked the Russian invasion and that imposing sanctions and sending weapons has brought more death and destruction.
He says the only role for the Americans is to call for an immediate ceasefire followed by negotiations.
The debate was moderated by Soho Forum Director Gene Epstein.
Narrated by Nick Gillespie; edited by Brett Raney and John Osterhoudt.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Never pictured her as a neocon, but there are never enough lives for neocons to sacrifice for their morality.
Welch isn’t a neoconservative, but he becomes one if someone speaks Ill of NATO. Then he goes full Bolton.
Start now earning every week more than $7,000 to 8,000 by doing very simple and easy home based job online. Last month i have made $32,735 by doing this online job just in my part time for only 2 hrs. a day using my laptop. (res-13) This job is just awesome and easy to do in part time. Start earning more dollars online just by follow:-
.
instructions here:☛☛☛ https://yourjobs85.blogspot.com/
I guess that if you support the US coordinated coup ousting the democratically elected Ukrainian president in 2014 and replacement with a puppet Jew using Nazis to terrorize the population during the resulting 8 years of civil war on Russias border, you support sending weapons.
Never go full Bolton.
wow my post was taken down by the content nazi's at Reason. Ok for the second time..Cathy Young got her head handed to her. She was not prepared, had no coherent argument other than "Russia bad..Czar was bad" and didn't even try to refute Scott's points about the history of provocation by different administrations. There is something with Russian immigrants who become part of the meritless intelligensia (Kristol, Rubin, Boot, and Young) who are obsessed with Russia (and the middle east) and think it is America's role to fight and die for "old world grudges"...Cathy what are your thoughts on the West Bank..should we be arming the Palestinians? Oh boy don't go there..
"meritless intelligensia"
Jinx!
It’s rarely what it seems. Secrets require lies. Someone tried to vindicate all the evil actions of a group because they helped bankroll the war of 1812.
Satan worshiping lying Freemasons had lots at stake, like the central bank. Alexander Hamilton was born Alexander Levine.
http://www.businessinsider.com/rothschild-family-war-of-1812-conspiracy-2013-1#conspiracy-theorists-insist-hamilton-was-a-rothschild-agent-2
“The Rothschilds would go on to perfect the strategy of lending to countries on each side of a conflict over the following century of chronic warfare.“
Demonstrating that the groups priority interest wasn’t who won the war but that they would control everyone with debt regardless of the outcome.
And the proper response is not just no, but fuck no.
No.
Ukraine has no money. Our government is putting a gun to Americans' heads, taking our resources, and using those resources to increase our risk with no possibility for gain.
Ukraine is the American people's enemy.
Ukraine is a tool, not an enemy. The enemies are the ones wielding it.
The bulk of the Ukrainian people are fine. They're even greater victims of their regime than we are (obviously).
That doesn't change the fact that the national entity, Ukraine, is partnered up with our regime in the globalist cabal to attack us and take our resources at gunpoint.
Yes, Ukraine is enemy.
I actually have made $18k within a calendar month via working easy jobs from a laptop. As I had lost my last business, I was so upset and thank God I searched this simple job (phy-12) achieving this I'm ready to achieve thousand of dollars just from my home. All of you can certainly join this best job and could collect extra money on-line visiting this site.
>>>>>>>>>> http://getjobs49.tk
He says the only role for the Americans is to call for an immediate ceasefire followed by negotiations.
At this point I think the EU and US lack the credibility to do any such thing. The only way to get Putin to ease off is for Ukraine to trade territory for peace (more territory than it would have taken four months ago), or for China and India to apply the type of pressure suggested (Putin is effectively the Mussolini to Xi's Hitler nowadays). The West backing away from its proxy war would do nothing but doom Ukraine faster, and likely incentivize further revanchist adventurism by Russia.
That being said, the way this war is being conducted by the West is a worst-of-both-worlds situation. We really do need to shit or get off the pot.
Ukraine doesn't need to "trade territory" they need to accept that Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk aren't Ukraine anymore because Kiev drove those peoples away.
They're going to need to offer more than recognition of those three as Russian possessions in order to achieve peace. The Russians are in an extremely advantageous position and it would be stupid for them to let up voluntarily.
At this point, probably. Won't be surprised to see Russia take Odessa. But my main point is that those 3 territories are NOT Ukraine. To say they are is to deny the principle of self determination and legitimacy of declaring independence from their previous sovereign. As an American opposed to globalist totalitarianism (liberal world order), I think it important to continue pointing this out.
"The only way to get Putin to ease off is for Ukraine to trade territory for peace (more territory than it would have taken four months ago)"
The problem is that the United States and UK, and to a lesser extent the EU, have basically told Ukraine that if it wants our support, it keeps fighting. Their economy is pretty much over at this point, and all that remains is whatever the West is willing to provide them. And the US and UK prefer Ukraine to fight, because our political leaders rather all their base show solidarity with blue and yellow flags on their twitter feeds than eat them alive for incompetence. The EU, on the other hand, would rather Ukrainians are being shot and bombed rather than Poles, Lithuanians or Germans or...
The US does have the power to stop this, and that is by putting aside the self interest of wartime politics and encouraging Ukraine to settle. In late March, Russia was willing to give guarantees of protection, and accept Ukraine joining EU in return for some territory and a promise not to join NATO. While I am not sure they will get the same deal, since the West has proven incapable of deterring Russia from indiscriminately shelling Ukrainian homes and infrastructure, they could probably get something close.
"accept Ukraine joining EU in return for some territory and a promise not to join NATO."
*Again, the issue is not Ukraine "giving up" territory in regards to Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk. Those territories are not Ukraine, which is merely being asked to stop attacking people who voted for independence from Ukraine (by referendum margins of 97%, 78%, and 76% respectively).
Libertarians would do well to stop treating the people of those regions as serfs who belong to Kiev.
Nardz, I agree with some of what you say, and disagree on others.
I think we both agree: Ukraine is not an American problem. It is a European problem that requires a European solution. And Europe includes Russia, in my mind.
Crimea has had a Russian base, with Russian infrastructure and Russian nationals living there for decades. Crimea is now Russia, whether we like it or not, pragmatically speaking. Ukraine ultimately decides whether they are willing to part with Crimea without a fight. That isn't wrong.
As for Donetsk and Luhansk: Ukraine should be able to solve their own internal problems without Russian interference. Russia was wrong to invade Ukraine, and violated a legal treaty with Ukraine in doing so. Ukraine ultimately decides whether they are willing to part with Donetsk and Luhansk without a fight. That isn't wrong, either.
There is a long history between Russia and Ukraine (500+ years), that most Americans are completely ignorant of. People should understand that history, and take the time to understand Russia's POV vis a vis Ukraine. They have concerns (misplaced, IMO) regarding NATO expansion. Russian culture is not like America's.
What to do? Well first and foremost, reinforce our NATO allies. It needs to be made crystal clear (privately) that any move on a NATO alliance member will bring about the destruction of Russia's military in the European theater. And it is pretty obvious that NATO would crush Russia in a conventional battle; the Russians can't match our tactics, or training, or equipment. They aren't moving west. What Europe can do is help send body bags back to Russia, by sending military assistance to the Ukrainians. America should not be directly arming and equipping the Ukrainians, IMO.
We can bleed Russia dry at a relatively low cost to America. Our GDP is something like 20T annually. What is 50B? Peanuts. That approach also has the advantage of preserving our military capacity for the real fight we are about to have: China.
Last point: This entire sorry episode has convinced me that POTUS Biden is completely bought and paid for by Ukraine and China, via Hunter Biden.
"As for Donetsk and Luhansk: Ukraine should be able to solve their own internal problems without Russian interference. Russia was wrong to invade Ukraine, and violated a legal treaty with Ukraine in doing so. Ukraine ultimately decides whether they are willing to part with Donetsk and Luhansk without a fight. That isn't wrong, either."
Kiev has spent 8 years violating legal treaties and committing atrocities, and has for 8 years been asking Russia for direct help. Kiev doesn't get to decide whether Ukraine parts with Luhansk and Donetsk, the people of Luhansk and Donetsk do. They did, with 3/4 choosing to leave. I'm not going to condemn Russia for not sitting back and watching them get slaughtered with American weapons by American trained troops.
We're the baddies here.
This. Kiev signed onto the Minsk accords in 2015, which was an agreement to cease hostilities and let Donetsk and Luhansk be semi-autonomous in exchange for Russian forces leaving those areas. Kiev's version of solving its own problems was to ignore the agreement and continue fighting to retake land it had agreed to essentially leave alone.
The logical libertarian position here doesn't seem to be that a government gets to keep trying to kill or conquer people that no longer wish to be associated with them, especially after said government signed an agreement to leave said people alone.
Right?
What to do? Well first and foremost, reinforce our NATO allies. It needs to be made crystal clear (privately) that any move on a NATO alliance member will bring about the destruction of Russia's military in the European theater."
Why? Fuck NATO, all it does is take resources from the American people to further enrich globalist oligarchs. And fuck the EU, Russia would be a better ally for a multitude of strategic reasons (though our globalist oligarchs have killed that possibility). Learn who our real fucking enemies are- it ain't Putin or the Russians. It's the assholes who jack up our energy prices through regulation, and tell us we'll own nothing and eat bugs instead of meat.
"And it is pretty obvious that NATO would crush Russia in a conventional battle; the Russians can't match our tactics, or training, or equipment."
Oh? I wouldn't be so sure of that.
"They aren't moving west."
Agreed, unless our totalitarian globalist overlords force their hand.
"What Europe can do is help send body bags back to Russia, by sending military assistance to the Ukrainians. America should not be directly arming and equipping the Ukrainians, IMO."
Europe can do what it wants, but I sure as hell won't be rooting for them. Europe, like the US, is run by the most evil people who have ever existed. I hope the citizenry rises up and starts decorating their roadsides with impaled EU bureaucrats.
Nardz, are you seriously going to make the case that Russia's military capacity even remotely comes close to ours? Please. You see what happened near Kiev; it was a higher tech version of a class on defensive lethality. How many thousands of Russian conscripts are now dead?
Ukraine decides it's own internal affairs. You and I may agree on whether the results of referenda are relevant or not (they are), and whether the government of Ukraine reneged on representations they made about the referenda results (an open question, but quite likely). Where we part ways: Ukraine, not Russia, decides it's own fate. Ukraine may choose to fight on; this is a sovereign nation's choice, and their right. To me, it is a Ukrainian civil war (which America would do well to avoid).
Last point. NATO matters. This is a legal treaty obligation that the US Congress ratified, using our constitutional process of treaty ratification; it is binding to America until the treaty is formally abrogated. Your hostility to NATO is misplaced. Write your congressman and senators to change the treaty, or abrogate it. Be pissed at Congress; they're the ones who ratified the treaty. Therefore, yes, it makes sense for America to privately convey to Russia, "Don't move west on any NATO member, because your military capacity in the European theater will be utterly destroyed", and to be ready to execute (if Russia stupidly invades a NATO member). In a conventional fight against NATO, Russia's European troops will be smashed to shit; Russia cannot match NATO's equipment, training and tactics. If you think Russia can match up conventionally against NATO....well, then you're going to have an unexpected surprise.
Nardz, with respect (and I mean that), you're just off-base on NATO; I thought a libertarian value was to uphold treaty obligations that we formally and voluntarily agreed to. Is this not the case?
Can you refute the argument I made on how 50B in a 20T economy is a small price to pay to bleed Russia of military capacity to move west? Or that a benefit is preserving our military capacity for a coming fight (China)?
Fuck Ukraine, fuck NATO, fuck the psychotic desire to spend billions "bleeding Russia", and fuck warmongering.
Get a fucking grip, dude, and stop forming your opinions on taking pathological liars at their word.
Your entire response is a desperate attempt to justify bog standard neocon progressivism because russiamanbad.
Because this is looking more and more like the second act of Vietnam, I must point out that the 'domino theory' was right, and every left wing fantasy was wrong.
I'm starting to come around to the theory that it's always the affluent white women who are the problem.
Cathy Young, for shame!
Lulz. You people are insane. There will never be an "easier" way to keep Russia out of Europe.
When are you leaving for Kyiv? My money may already be there, but my body never will be.
*Kiev
You really are just a Russian bot
How is jfree's stupid ass still alive after the covid apocalypse?
Do yourself a favor and take a lead vaccine, pussy.
Europe WANTS them there. EUROPE is the one leaning on Russia for energy incessantly.
Trump was right to bitch about it.
Green energy policies to become dependent on Russian energy sources is clearly the path to take here.
No
Wait--Reason is saying 'yes' to proxy war?
Jeez. When you rip off the mask, you strip the face down to the bone.
It's a proxy war not just on Russia, but on the American (and European) people as well.
Of course Reason is for it.
Part of the liberal world order.
Nope. It's saying: Yes, let's help our Ukranian brothers and sisters defeat Russian fascism.
You're saying yes to proxy war, and forcing the American people to participate.
You are our enemy.
Cathy Young, a writer at the Bulwark and a contributing editor at Reason, is a Moscow-native who migrated to the U.S. as a teenager, argued that the U.S. government is correct to impose sanctions on Russia and to send military and economic support to Ukraine.
What if those sanction have literally the opposite effect?
Cathy Young, as a member of the meritless intelligentsia, pretty clearly supports sanctions on the American people.
Afghanistan
Short answer no.
Long answer: either libertarians believe in the almighty dollar, in which case sell all the weapons to everyone (because free markets), or they believe that the US should mind it's own business.
Ukraine does not have any money to buy weapons from American companies.
It is 100% redistribution from the American people to globalist oligarchs.
"...Long answer: either libertarians believe in the almighty dollar, in which case sell all the weapons to everyone (because free markets), or they believe that the US should mind it's own business."
Nobartium offers false dichotomy.
Good to know that a Libertarian supports arming freedom loving Ukies against fascist Russia. It's not surprising that the antiwar commie takes Putin the thug's side since there's just a fine line between communism and fascism. Support Ukraine at their official donation site, U24.gov.ua
Throw out more buzzwords, State Department bot.
Get your pussy totalitarian globalist ass yeeted, post haste.
"Should the U.S. Be Arming Ukraine Against Russia?"
No.
That Reason has to claim Cathy Young as one of their own in this case is pretty embarrassing. It got really tiring to listen to that neocon rebut every argument by saying anyone who thinks this issue should be resolved at a peace table rather than military brinkmanship between two nuclear alliances is just rehashing Putin talking points. She seemed incapable of comprehending the idea that Scott could simultaneously be sincere any of the dozen times he said Russia was wrong to invade Ukraine while still believing dumping weapons into a conflict against a nuclear power with grave security concerns isn't the best course of action.
This debate is interesting but to suggest that Russia invaded Ukraine because of NATO expansion is naïve at best. Putin has been very vocal for years about his goals. Re-establish the Soviet Unions old boundaries, become a world power again and seize all the oil, wheat etc as possible to hold Europe hostage. It's a power play by a dictator that doesn't play by the same rules as everyone else, nothing more
No amount of hand wringing or excuse making will negate the fact that a sovereign country was invaded. Period.
Yes, sovereign Luhansk and Donetsk were invaded by Ukraine.
Bullshit.
Now do "liberal world order", "great reset", and "build back better"
https://twitter.com/emeriticus/status/1545633980682215425?t=J8XrIPq5TgEy_RC_aiq0yA&s=19
Investigation finds Ukrainian soldiers took up positions inside a nursing home, "effectively making the building a target," and separatist fighters gave assistance to patients and staff who fled the home. Somebody at AP might get fired for writing this.
"The bottom-line rule is that civilians cannot intentionally be targeted. Period. For whatever reason," said David Crane, a former U.S. Defense Department official. "The Ukrainians placed those people in a situation which was a killing zone. And you can’t do that." oh
This is actually the West's Ukraine strategy: maximize the number of civilians killed to create moral outrage in the public to support increased Western involvement while frustrating every attempt to end the war peacefully.
[Link]
WASHINGTON ― The U.S. will send Ukraine another $1 billion in weapons to fight Russia, including Harpoon anti-ship launchers for the first time, and more ammunition for high-tech, medium-range rocket launchers, the Biden administration announced Wednesday.
Sadly, Reason feels the need to identify Cathy Young as one of their own in this situation. Listening to that neocon refute every argument by claiming that anyone who believes that this matter should be settled at a peace table rather than through military brinkmanship between two nuclear alliances is merely repeating Putin's talking points grew pretty tiresome.ReadMore:
dental billing services