Yesterday, Russian leader Vladimir Putin broke his agreements to respect Ukraine’s independence and sovereignty. When he massed troops on Ukraine’s border, he denied intending to attack Ukraine. He was lying (and everyone knew he was). Here’s what Elise Stefanik, the #3 ranking House Republican, says about all that:
“After just one year of a weak, feckless, and unfit President of the United States and Commander-in-Chief, the world is less safe. Rather than peace through strength, we are witnessing Joe Biden’s foreign policy of war through weakness. For the past year, our adversaries around the world have been assessing and measuring Joe Biden’s leadership on the world stage, and he has abysmally failed on every metric. From kinetic and deadly attacks on our allies and partners, to the catastrophic withdrawal and surrender in Afghanistan, to the cyber attacks impeding American industry and infrastructure, to today’s Russian invasion of Ukraine, Joe Biden and his Administration have failed America and the world.”
This is precisely the disunity and dissension within the U.S. that Putin was hoping for. Read story here.
This is especially ironic given that Stefanik got her House leadership position because of her fawning loyalty to Trump, who held military assistance to Ukraine hostage for fabricated dirt on Biden. Trump, a determined isolationist, also turned his back on NATO and tried to remove sanctions against Russia. Does anyone (except die-hard Trumper Republicans) believe he wouldn’t have let Putin roll into Ukraine, and not lifted a finger to discourage him?
Also, I have this question for all the Republicans criticizing Biden as “weak”: How would you have stopped Putin from invading Ukraine? The answer is they couldn’t have, so they’re just blowing smoke. It’s easy to criticize when you don’t have to make decisions. It’s cheap talk, nothing more. But I don’t expect anything constructive or helpful from Republicans anyway. They’ve disappointed me too many times.
Related story: Numerous other prominent Republicans also are attacking America’s leader, too, instead of rallying behind him in a crisis (see story here). P.S., I remember rightwingers calling dissenters who questioned George W. Bush’s 2003 invasion of Iraq “traitors.” If that’s how we discuss such issues, and I’m not saying we should, then doesn’t that cut both ways?