And the reason for my meta comment about HN is because honestly I’m dismayed and disappointed with what this place has turned into. There is only room for one opinion now. And sadly, peace is not the opinion. “Trump want peace. Trump bad. Peace bad.”
Why should the U.S. stop aiding Ukraine?
What do you think about Trump’s attitude being like that of Neville Chamberlain, who mistakenly believed that appeasement (note that “peace” is a root word) would stop Germany from further territorial invasions?
And finally, do you believe Trump’s and Vance’s behavior was appropriate for their appointed roles (as leaders and heads of state)? When considering your answer, if you had children, would you be proud of them if they behaved this way?
First and foremost, I don’t want war. I don’t want to contribute weapons to send people to die pointlessly.
Second, even if you’re pro war, the United States has crumbling infrastructure, massive debt, and plenty of people who have paid taxes that themselves need help. We are not in a position to be pouring billions of dollars to non citizens at this point in time.
> who mistakenly believed that appeasement (note that “peace” is a root word) would stop Germany from further territorial invasions?
I don’t think you can point to that story and automatically prove that that’s what this is. Sure it’s a great lesson on what to watch for but it’s also a great story line for war hawks.
> do you believe Trump’s and Vance’s behavior was appropriate for their appointed roles (as leaders and heads of state)?
From the perspective of transparency, what more could you ask for? We saw passion for making a peace deal. But peace is not everybody’s priority.
This conflict has not been solved in decades of closed room talks. Why would anybody think that’s the way to keep going?
Zelensky was disrespectful in many ways. He’s only still in this fight because of the US. He knew damn well why he was flown to Washington this time. Trump wants the ceasefire. He should be thankful for what he’s getting instead of confrontational. He is owed absolutely nothing.
> When considering your answer, if you had children, would you be proud of them if they behaved this way?
If they were genuinely wanting peace, yes. If it was theatrics with bad intent, no.
Exactly how? Did he spit in Trump’s face? Call his wife a strumpet? Or what?
The mere act of asking for help isn’t disrespectful. If your kids came to you and asked you for help, even though they knew you were disinclined, would that alone be “disrespectful”?
> He’s only still in this fight because of the US. He knew damn well why he was flown to Washington this time. Trump wants the ceasefire. He should be thankful for what he’s getting instead of confrontational. He is owed absolutely nothing.
The USA’s attitude has never to date been “we don’t consider favors to others because we owe them nothing; people to whom we don’t owe anything should kiss our ass.” Sure, nobody owes us anything in the way of foreign relations. We do things because it advances our interests. Trump, like you, clearly believes helping Ukraine doesn’t advance our interests. We may disagree on that, but our President certainly shouldn’t be a jerk when communicating that and constantly interrupt our guest while they’re trying to communicate. That’s disrespectful.
> If they were genuinely wanting peace, yes. If it was theatrics with bad intent, no.
I was talking about Trump’s and Vance’s behavior, not Zelensky’s.
I agree but that’s not what happened. Watch the whole event, if you haven’t. Because snippets don’t do justice. And I’m not going to rewatch it just to reply to you. But you’re really misrepresenting what went down. It’s fine if we disagree over what is disrespectful. But I think you can at least admit, if you watch the whole thing, how his behavior can be interpreted that way even if you personally don’t think it merited the response it got.
This sort of reply is why you're getting downvoted: Making an argument based on emotion and characterization of others without evidence.
Persuasion is the burden of the claimant. If you believe Zelensky was being disrespectful and merited the President's and VP's response, that is your case to make, clearly, logically, and with reference to the source material. That's Debate 101. It's not your opponents' duty to prove a negative.
I believe that you and folks like you don't want war, and that's in good faith. I don't think anyone really wants war. I think the question comes down to what we're willing to sacrifice to avoid it. This is a totally reasonable argument to have, but we don't have to publicly demean and dress down other heads of state, especially those who are our guests, in the process.
This administration is not actually addressing any of this btw. It isn't even clear that the billions of dollars "saved" from withdrawing support from Ukraine would even go to infrastructure, debt, or helping people. In fact, just the opposite, because the administration is slashing the exact programs for people who need help (laying off suicide hotline workers at the VA).