Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Murtaza Hussain
@mazmhussain
JD Vance is a Ukraine-skeptic in the sense of opposing the prosecution of the war as presently conducted and with current goals; but he has also said recently that it would be against America’s interest if Russia were to march on Kyiv or a similarly extreme outcome. So in a different framing one can say that he actually has a moderate position on the subject. He would likely lean on Ukraine to accept a loss of territory in exchange for a ceasefire but he would not facilitate an outright defeat that resulted in the dissolution of the country.
6 replies
0 recast
15 reactions
Alex
@asenderling.eth
He specifically tried to get House Republicans to tank the Ukraine Aid package, has snubbed meetings with Zelensky, and refused invitations from his R senator colleagues to learn more about the conflict. He's the same kind of isolationist who would have allowed Hitler to seize all of Europe.
1 reply
0 recast
6 reactions
Leo
@lsn
I think both of you are probably completely accurate.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Murtaza Hussain
@mazmhussain
According to him, he would not surrender Ukraine entirely to Putin so I can only go based on his own comments. His actions do suggest that he’s not pro-the current war.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Alex
@asenderling.eth
I hope that's true, because upholding the Budapest Memorandum and demonstrating that countries will continue to be protected even at financial costs for the choice to denuclearize is more important for long term peace than any temporary peace deal imo.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Murtaza Hussain
@mazmhussain
No country should denuclearize; world is too cold for that. Even Gadaffi was killed after he gave up his WMD programs
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
