2/ speaking of Ukraine, treaties, and commitments, does anyone else remember when the US provided "security assurances against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine" in return for Ukraine's nukes?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances …
-
-
Show this thread
-
3/ so, yeah, Russia invading Ukraine wasn't great ...but the US just refusing to live up to its SIGNED SECURITY COMMITMENTS was damning AF
Show this thread -
4/ There's a great argument to be made that the US should not have started WW III with Russia over the annexation of the Crimea. Hell, there's a good argument that Russia should be allowed to annex the Crimea (long story, different rant).
Show this thread -
5/ But us promising security for nukes, then wiffing, was as bad as what Hillary did in Libya. We've twice now shown small players that they absolutely can not trust us when it comes to giving up their WMD. Large nation states need nukes to defend territorial integrity >
Show this thread -
6/ ...and small states need them even more. If I was the Czar of BackWater-istan, I'd make getting nukes my 2nd highest priority ... and keeping them, my 1st highest.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.