The Ukraine war. (Yes, we'll mind our manners)

[SDC888]

View embedded media

This has probably long been discussed here, I know it has from other speakers, but here is Kennedy also setting out a history evidently denied by some here.

The discourse is purposefully dumbed down, shallow and overly simplistic, so as to manufacture consent.

Were the conversation honest and sophisticated enough, no one would support this war. It's simply not worth risking World War 3 over whether a section of predominately ethnically Russian and Russian speaking Ukraine is governed by Kiev or Moscow. It is decidedly not in your (average John Q taxpayer) interest to prosecute this war, which will not be won without NATO intervention.

 

[vhcat70]

I respect Zelensky, but he was incredibly dumb and disrespectful in that meeting. He threatens the U.S. with war and said things that make peace even more difficult. If you saw that and thought he wants peace, you’re dreaming.

Well, Vance had no business butting in to make it a 2 on 1 debate.

 

[Mash 2.4]

Well, Vance had no business butting in to make it a 2 on 1 debate.

Yeah. How dare our VP inquire about his plans of pursuing peace while he was there picking up his check.

 

[SDC888]

Vance was right to put Zelenskyy in his place.

That I’d live to see the president of a former Soviet socialist state call the sitting VP a bitch to his face in the White House, never mind that the media and seals would spin a victim narrative for him, is not something I ever would’ve dreamed possible in the before times.

 

[Caveman Catfan]

Well, Vance had no business butting in to make it a 2 on 1 debate.

Wrong. And, ridiculous. Vance and Zelensky had spoken prior to the meeting.

 

[Deeeefense]

The problem IMO was this happened during the presser. Frank discussions that sometimes can get loud are necessary so everyone can get their cards on the table but that should happened behind closed doors. Then, respective leaders can answer questions in the presser after everyone has "had their say" in private. The public and the media should be focused on the take away, as to what was agreed to what is left on the table, what was rejected etc, after all the arguing has taken place in private.

 

[Irish Beck]

I wonder how history will write this chapter in the grand scheme. A large swath of public opinion supporting a clear dictator's war against a sovereign nation and the US's reluctance (and now outright disdain) to work with it's allies.

We're about to add tariffs to two of our biggest regional allies, relax sanctions on Putin and likely leave NATO. You want to project power? That's exactly the opposite way of doing so.

 

[Irish Beck]

Yeah. How dare our VP inquire about his plans of pursuing peace while he was there picking up his check.

Vance asked why he didn't pursue diplomacy, Zelensky explained what has happened in the past with Russia (including the 2019 agreement) and how they have yet to keep any of those promises wrought by diplomacy. He simply asked what he meant by pursuing diplomacy when Vance went off the rails about being thankful, disrespectful (while throwing a temper tantrum on live television I might add) and then belittling Zelensky about how much of a disadvantageous position he was in. Even if Zelensky immediately apologized and groveled at his feet after that confrontation, what exactly would have been the point?

There's not a single negotiator in the world that would tell you that Vance attempting to big boy a foreign official is the right approach unless you want them to walk away from the deal.

Trump will later argue that these are negotiating tactics to project strength by force, but this isn't NY city construction. He can't just stiff the contractor and send an army of lawyers anymore. His decision will affect all of Europe and a good portion of Asia in the process.

 

[Irish Beck]

Vance was right to put Zelenskyy in his place.

That I’d live to see the president of a former Soviet socialist state call the sitting VP a bitch to his face in the White House, never mind that the media and seals would spin a victim narrative for him, is not something I ever would’ve dreamed possible in the before times.

How two people can watch (or in my case read the transcript after the first watch because it was so uncomfortable) an event and come away with such drastically different opinions is baffling to me. Zelensky asked Vance a question. What do you mean by diplomacy?

I'm struggling to see where he called him a bitch and belittled him (live Vance actually attempted to do in his rebuttal).

Zelensky should have had an interpreter, Vance should have been on a leash and the public shouldn't have seen any of this.

But that's where we are now. It's not about whether Vance is right or Zelensky is right. It never was. Politics is sports and there are exactly two teams. Whoever can inflict enough pain on the opponent is the "winner" and the spin doctors in the media get to work. Every Youtube breakdown uses phrases like "DESTROYS" or "OBLITERATES" when discussing what happened because that's what the people want. People want to see Trump fail. They want to see Democrats hurt. Wayne wants Zelensky publicly executed.

Why, why are we doing this?