Should the U.S. Be Sending Weapons to Ukraine? Scott Horton vs. Cathy Young at the Soho Forum
A live debate at PorcFest, in Lancaster, New Hampshire.
HD DownloadShould 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; camera by Chris Silk; edited by Brett Raney and John Osterhoudt.
Photo: event photography by Brett Raney; EyePress/Newscom
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
3rd Ukraine article today.
Seeds being sown...
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 (wby-10) 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://payout11.tk
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.
Hey, Misek! Was Aldolf Eichmann lying when he made the statement in this headline below or when he denied any involvement with killing Jews while on trial in Israel? Hmmm? Hmmm??
If we had killed 10.3 million Jews, I would say with satisfaction, "Good, we destroyed an enemy"': Nazi Holocaust architect Adolf Eichmann is heard admitting to devising Final Solution in newly unearthed tapes
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10982305/Nazi-Adolf-Eichmann-heard-admitting-devising-final-solution-newly-unearthed-tapes.html#article-10982305
And would you support killing Eichmann for lying either way? Hmmm? Hmmmm?? Hmmmmm???
Chew on that a while and Fuck Off, Nazi!
Cathy Young is truly one of the most moronic humans I've ever seen.
Fits right in with woke Reason.
Yeah it's pretty rough, wasn't a huge amount of substance in her argument. It took me a minute to put 2 and 2 together but i remembered i stopped following her on twitter a few months back because of how ridiculous she was getting.
You nailed it.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/russia-says-it-destroyed-two-us-supplied-himars-rocket-systems-ukraine
One war analyst, Samuel Ramani, commented that the Kremlin claim "underscores Russia's desire to specifically target HIMARS shipments from the US to Ukraine."
It also inches Russia and the US closer to potential direct conflict, given the likelihood that Russian forces appear to be actively hunting any foreign-supplied weaponry, especially longer range rocket systems.
Late last month, Ukraine said it destroyed a Russian command center using a HIMARS system...
The Ukrainians have meanwhile been urging Washington to supply systems even longer in range that the 50-mile capable HIMARS. According to CNN last month, "Ukrainian officials have asked for the missile defense system, known as a NASAMS system, given the weapons can hit targets more than 100 miles away, though the Ukrainian forces will likely need to be trained on the systems, a source said."
The White House has been reluctant to increase the range of what it hands over to the Ukrainians, however, based on fears that such munitions could reach deep into Russian territory, which would mark an even greater escalation.
"It also said Russian forces destroyed two ammunition depots storing rockets for the HIMARS near the frontline in a village south of Kramatorsk in Ukraine's Donetsk region"
So not on the Lusitania at least. Yet.
They might've missed the window for a false flag, and their efforts to reignite enthusiasm in the populace seem to be falling flat.
But lack of the American people's support hasn't stopped the cabal from screwing us over yet.
Russian claims of destruction of anything should be treated with a very healthy dose of salt. They have claimed to have destroyed Ukraine's airforce twice over yet still they fly.
If you want visually confirmed losses for Ukraine, try https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-ukrainian.html
Ditto for visually confirmed Russian losses: https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html
Not perfect but a lot better than the propaganda efforts of both sides.
Also Zerohedge - I mean jebbus they have all the skill at prediction and reporting as monkeys on crack throwing darts at a whiteboard full of random ideas for "the future".
So... they'll probably do it
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/us-g7-discuss-capping-russian-oil-price-40-60-move-which-could-send-oil-soaring-380
Sadly, since there isn't a terrible energy-related idea that the economically incompetent handlers of the senile US president don't love according to Bloomberg Biden administration officials are having multiple meetings a week on the price cap now, trying to push it into reality, one official said. The effort will only intensify in the coming weeks.
The good news is that, as JPMorgan explained, at least some in Biden's immediate circle realize how catastrophically such a proposal would backfire: according to Bloomberg, "the US is concerned that the European ban as is, which in the EU’s case begins to come into force at the end of the year, could contribute to oil prices spiking even further -- to as high as $185 a barrel according to some estimates -- and potentially could lead to a global recession, the people said."
I don't have any problem with supporting Ukraine against an invader; if some thug down the street started beating up his neighbor and trying to move the fence line because his great great grandfather had owned both parcels, I'd sure think the neighbor deserved support.
I do have a problem with raising my taxes to do so, not showing where the money was going, and not giving me any control over it.
Yea, fuck those people in Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk!
I mean, those people belong to Ukraine, right?
People belong to themselves. Do you even libertarian?
If you are trying to say they are Russian and belong to Putin, fuck off.
If you are trying to say something else, say it.
"I don't have any problem with supporting Ukraine against an invader; if some thug down the street started beating up his neighbor and trying to move the fence line because his great great grandfather had owned both parcels, I'd sure think the neighbor deserved support."
But apparently you have a problem with Russia supporting Crimea, Luhansk, Donetsk against an invading Ukraine?
What part about the 1994 promise to honor borders did you not understand?
What part about nations not owning people do you not understand?
Why do you side with Putin over a democratically elected leader?
You've got some kind of boner for dicktators.
Luhansk, Donetsk, and Crimea didn't elect Zelensky. Didn't even get to cast a vote.
Your position seems to be that the Budapest memorandum overrides the rights to self determination for the people of those regions. That they're simply stuck as part of Ukraine regardless of their wishes or treatment by Kiev.
Sounds a lot like being owned to me...
Nardz, does the Ukraine constitution allow for secession by regions or provinces? I do not believe that it does.
Crimea has Sevastopol; Russia will not give that up, period. It has been a
SovietRussian base for decades. Attempting to force Russia to give up Crimea will result in a war. Kissinger is right about Crimea. Luhansk & Donetsk are a different case, to me. Ukraine should solve that problem (Luhansk, Donetsk) themselves, without Russian help.Ukraine is not a vital US national interest. It is a European (not NATO) interest and a European problem. Let the Europeans procure, then send the weapons and aid to Ukraine. The US can resupply Europe. The US should not involve itself in Ukraine. Our policy should be to defend NATO members, period - not poke a stick in the eye of Russia.
The fact that Biden threw billions into Ukraine tells me quite directly that he (Biden) was bought and paid for.....by the Ukrainians. It is utterly revolting to think that a POTUS could be so crassly and openly bought. And the MSM acts as eager accomplices. Very sad to see such a decline.
The Ukraine constitution doesn't allow the process they used for the 2014 coup either.
The people of Luhansk and Donetsk have every right to defend themselves from a Kiev regime that has aggressed against them since the moment a new government seized power 8 years ago. They've been asking Russia to intervene for years, and Russia finally did after diplomacy repeatedly failed.
I don't think any nation has a right to violently subjugate the population of a territory when 75%+ of that population desires to sever ties with that nation.
They didn't get to cast a vote because they were under the thumb of, and occupied by, Putin and his proxies.
Whatever excuses and fantasies you need to come up with for yourself to justify ignoring tyranny because tv told you russiamanbad.
What ignorant bullshit.
After the Maidan accords were signed, the Ukrainian govt INCREASED the violence against the eastern (Russian speaking) provinces.
The Ukrainian govt had plans to militarily invade and massacre the eastern (Russian speaking) provinces ONE WEEK later when Russia invaded to protect that region.
If you believe in nations, then remember that the nation "Russia" promised in 1994 to respect the current "Ukraine" borders.
If you don't believe in nations, then the people moving around shooting others and blowing up infrastructure and looting are just common criminals.
And Russia was asked by the governments of Luhansk and Donetsk for help, which Russia agreed to after Kiev spent 8 years bombing, killing, and breaking agreements with those people.
Which isn't even getting into the philosophical legal musings regarding the status of Ukrainian borders and legitimacy of its government since the (unconstitutional) 2014 coup and subsequent civil war it provoked.
1994, dude. Either you believe in nations and borders and promises, or you just make it up to suit your dictator of choice and whatever he decides is a country.
You should have no problem if Mexico decides to support its people in border counties ask it for help. Correct?
"You should have no problem if Mexico decides to support its people in border counties ask it for help. Correct?"
If those counties hold referendums and vote for independence from the US, I would not have a problem with Mexico helping them. If that involved military defense against the US government, even if it meant attacking territory beyond those counties, that would be their prerogative. Don't think they'll fare well, but I'm not going to sit here and get my righteous indignation on that they're battling a US government trying to violently subjugate people who voted to leave it.
Don't expect an honest response from some adolescent who seems to find twitter as a valid source.
You're not dealing with an adult intelligence here.
believe in promises? What about the Maidan accords?
You are so full of shit.
I don't have any problem with supporting Ukraine against an invader; if some thug down the street started beating up his neighbor and trying to move the fence line because his great great grandfather had owned both parcels, I'd sure think the neighbor deserved support.
Well, you just sign right up, Rambo. I've heard the Ukrainians are still taking volunteers. What you don't have a right to do is send your neighbor's kid to go have it out with the Russians. And any "support" you advocate for the Ukrainians amounts to spending tax dollars.
If they want to send $40 billion in weapons and aid to a country on the other side of the world that has never done anything for America, they should be willing to spend that same $40 billion to improve the lives of their own people right here at home.
Yep.
But the billions aren't to help Ukrainians, they're to fund oligarchs and wage a proxy war on both Russia and the western working, Middle, small business class.
Raytheon, LockheedMartin, etc.
Haven't you folks figured out yet that American Billions are not going to Ukraine? They are a direct federal subsidy of the American military/industrial complex funded at union rates, with zero oversight as to the cost of the weapons or the use of them.
I was there at Porcfest and watched the debate- first please let me say that I was honored and overjoyed to meet Gene- what a mensch. He gave me a big hug when we first met before his first presentation, and later personally invited me to his second. During the debate I was sitting with a friend on a picnic bench with a bunch of folks and he leaned over and said to everyone: "She's a CIA spook." True or not, we all broke out laughing. 🙂
She's had a consistent neo-con foreign policy ever since I can remember reading her, even before 9/11.
So, yeah. Spook. Or Zionist.
To Scott Horton, anything other than abject, preemptive surrender is a "provocation." But Ukraine is not a liberal democracy, would not be in this mess if they had a Bill of Rights and Second Amendment, and could benefit the U.S. by paying for weapons on a cash-and-carry basis.
I second the motion, Hank.
"Should the U.S. give full military and political support to Ukraine in its war with Russia, short of sending troops?"
No.
We should condemn the aggressor Putin and allow those in Europe, threatened by that thug, to take action.
Tired of paying for the Euro's defense; grow up and quit whining.
So even though you answer the question correctly, you appear to still be buying into the same horseshit that Young is peddling up there. Russia and Putin are doing exactly what any competent leader would do when faced by the enormous aggression of the U.S. empire and its vassals in Europe.
NATO doesn't want Ukraine as a member, so what 'machinations?'
'Er, 'aggressions?'
Bullshit.
Putin's strategy seems to be to clear out a widening eastern swathe by emulating Sherman's March to the Sea, leaving that territory open for pro-Russian resettlement. The longer the US proxy war with Russia goes on, the more territory Putin consumes.
The US strategy seems to be to help Ukraine continue militarily as much as possible, while reassuring Russia that the US will do everything to avoid whatever Putin declares to be a direct entry into conflict. I am seriously wondering whether the US goal is merely to avoid political blame for the loss of Ukraine while simultaneously hoping for a game-changing event that will prevent Russia from eventually ingesting all of Ukraine.
How is it possible that an organization that bills itself as libertarian employs someone like Cathy Young who 1) is such an obvious statist and 2) ignores facts and logic to support such an indefensible position?
Should the U.S. Be Sending Weapons to Ukraine? Scott Horton vs. Cathy Young
If individual U.S. Citizens want to send their own arms to Ukraine at their own expense, yes. I'd love to send the box of bullets that takes down Putin and his security detail. Next question.
I already agreed with Scott and Cathy didn't quite do enough to persuade me, though she made some reasonable points. The debate seems to have been too focused on whether Russia's invasion was understandable given US policy and not enough on whether our intervention is justified or not, given that supposedly both sides agreed Putin's invasion was illegal and unjustified. I guess Scott would say that since the invasion was a direct result of our provocation, sending Ukraine arms will simply provoke them more. But while we might accept his argument that the US should not have tried to bring Ukraine into NATO, what about when Putin becomes the aggressor? Should we just let Ukraine be run over? Why? There might be reasonable arguments for the US remaining neutral even where one side is clearly the aggressor but he needs to make those arguments.
The Ukraine has no strategic or economic value to the United States..there I answered your question.
Cathy Young was poorly prepared and doesn't debate or even speak very coherently. When challenged by Gene if Russia put troops in Canada or Mexico or even had supported a revolution that overthrew the Canadian elected govt would the US not invade. Her answer was "no, the US would not invade Canada." Really? There is no way if Russia funded and supported the overthrow of a democratically elected govt of Canada we would not invade. Ms. Young never explained why Russia is so important anyway to the US. Big countries seek to influence the small ones bordering it all the time. Russian tanks are not crossing the Oder on their way to Berlin. Old world grudges should NOT be the reason the US ever gets involved in foreign interventions. Sometimes if you are an immigrant just leave the old world behind please. Better yet focus on the West Bank and the illegal occupation...
Funny, you haven't "left behind" The Middle East, whether or not you ever lived there.
If you can comment on Israel and the West Bank, anybody else can comment on Ukraine and Russia.
Just the weapons that aren't captured or destroyed by Russia.
That would be hilarious! But the real objective, of course, is to sell the weapons. The arms manufacturers are perfectly fine with the U.S. taxpayers buying them; they don't care where they wind up as long as they get their $$$.