Other stuff

[Gavagai]

The thing other NATO allies would struggle with if they did anything without the US is supply chains, which among other issues is what hurt the Russians.

Russians have excellent supply chains on the strategic level, it is on the operational and tactical levels they struggle. But otherwise - yes, few NATO armies are built with the intention to project power outside their borders (UK, French and Turkish off the top of my head)

[Mjmd]

I have 99% faith the US would at least air support any invasion of NATO countries. Although I think its going to be a long time before the Russian army would be ready for such an endeavor.

[Jowy]

For the sake of comparison. Biden evacuated American ships from the Black Sea right before the invasion, he evacuated American embassy from Kyiv right before the invasion, he told that America will not interfere militarily in case of invasion.
(Even if he had no plans to interfere, think: what could possible have been the purpose in saying it out loud?)

USA knew before the invasion that the invasion was happening without a doubt. Not sure what letting Americans die would accomplish here.

Anyway I can't take anything you say seriously if you think that making someone so incompetent, unhinged, selfish and evil as Trump the president of the most powerful country in the world is a good thing.

Putin is hysterically scared of the idea of a shooting war with USA, so if he thought there is even a slight chance that it would happen, he would have canceled the invasion. As a matter of fact, the simplest thing that would have stopped the invasion short would be Biden sending his vice-president to Kyiv and using her as a living shield until the Russians retreat.
About Trump's character - I think you are blinded by hatred and can't address this matter rationally, so our discussion would hardly be productive.

Likewise, you are so far removed from reality that there's no discussion to be had. It's not very interesting either, as your arguments here are just the usual "Trump is playing 4D chess" the Qanon nuts like to spew out.

At no point I attributed any unusual competence to Trump, in fact, I said the opposite - that pretty much any US President except Biden would be able to navigate this particular crisis. If you do not see even that, you should probably be less confident in your opinions about who is removed from reality.

Trump was working to pull USA out of the NATO, yet you think he would have scared off Russia or even had the desire to do that. It's also highly doubtful that somehow Biden happens to be the only possible president under whom this war would have happened. Especially since they already did attack Ukraine under another US president. What are your claims based on? Because it just seems like the usual right wing nutters attributing everything bad in the world to the current president and claiming that under their candidate it would be utopia.

[Jowy]

Ah I went back to read the article and now the anti-Biden stance makes sense. Makes the "you are blinded by hate" jab pretty ironic. Not that I can fault you for feeling so.

[Gavagai]

"Trump was working to pull USA out of the NATO" - if you take such baseless speculations seriously you probably should stop calling right-wing people "nutters".
"Especially since they already did attack Ukraine under another US president" - it was not an open invasion. Putin waited for a long while before he admitted that Russian troops were present in Crimea before the referendum and still did not officially admit they were present in Donbass before the independence was recognized. I think Obama dropped the ball in that situation but Putin did not expect him to ignore a full-scale war.
"What are your claims based on?"
1) Trump did a fairly effective job of containing Russian ambitions. He started supplying armaments to Ukraine, brought to attention the problem of German dependence on Russian gas and blocked North Stream and demonstrated resolve in Syria where he destroyed Russian paramilitaries. Observe how all of it are very concrete and very important things while what you offer in response are wild rumors like "was working to pull USA out of the NATO".
2) If Putin thought Trump would surrender "everything" to him he should have hurried up to attack before 2020 elections. Instead, he waited patiently for four years during which Trump was in power but mere months after Biden was elected started to escalate the situation on the Ukrainian border. There was a massive concentration of Russian forces on the border in Spring 2021 - a test for Biden, just like the incident with Wagner group was a test for Trump. Putin, very obviously, was pleased with the results (Biden gave a green light to North Stream).
3) I think there is an obvious logical connection between (1) and (2).

[Gavagai]

Ah I went back to read the article and now the anti-Biden stance makes sense. Makes the "you are blinded by hate" jab pretty ironic. Not that I can fault you for feeling so.

I do not hate Biden, I pity him. The man in his circumstances should be playing with grandsons in retirement, not forced to lead the only superpower in the world. I do not think he is specifically stupid or malicious (compared with the median politician), he is just in a mental state that is completely incompatible with his current job.

[darrelljs]

The best argument that Trump was good for Putin is that Russia tried to swing the election in Trump’s favor.

Edit: And thinking about it a bit, it’s probably not so much that Trump was directly helping Putin, but that his “America First” agenda was weakening America’s global influence.

Darrell

[Mjmd]

Jowy does tend to go too far. Trump weakened NATO, and in general antagonized practically all the USs traditional allies. I don't know what his goal was or if he even had one. Everything Trump did internationally was based on how he thought he base would view it. It didn't matter if it was good or smart, it was if he thought it would make him look good to 'his' people. Betray our 20 year allies in the Kurds for anti immigrant cred; checks out.
1) Aid to Ukraine started with the "Ukraine Freedom Support Act of 2014" which also included a lot of sanctions. Again, with the Syria Wagner thing there isn't proof there; at least none that has been presented.
2) Trump was ignoring Russian interference in US elections, refused to act on Russian bounties for killing US servicemen, and again as a reminder threatened to withhold military aid to Ukraine for political dirt. The whole betraying the Kurds also increased Russian clout in the middle east. He was also providing positive press for Putin.
3) Considering the first two has a lot of logical flaws.

The above was off the top of my head. To note in the following I'm leaving out things he "thought about doing / didn't want to do" as well as instances where he said "he was being sarcastic". I'm also leaving out things that are from "former officials" that aren't confirmed. Also, leaving out things that I believe MIGHT have been valid.

Others that stick out to me: During the 2016 campaign he said it was OK if Russia kept Crimea. 2016 R convention blocked language calling for US gov to send aid (this was part of Mueller investigating but determined it wasn't made on behest of Russia). 2017 he gave them highly classified intelligence about ISIS, which is prob valid, but there was concern Russia could figure out source. Trump did say NATO was obsolete. I think I mentioned somewhere above that Trump did ease some sanctions and tried to weaken others. Blocked his administration from giving statement 10th anniversary of Russia-Georgia war. Nov 2018 declined to publicly condemn Russian attack on Ukrainian military vessels. I am mentioning as there is congressional testimony on and it was prepared so all he had to do was read the thing. Called for Russia to be invited back to G7.

[Mjmd]

The best argument that Trump was good for Putin is that Russia tried to swing the election in Trump’s favor.

Darrell

This.

[Gavagai]

Jowy does tend to go too far. Trump weakened NATO, and in general antagonized practically all the USs traditional allies. I don't know what his goal was or if he even had one. Everything Trump did internationally was based on how he thought he base would view it. It didn't matter if it was good or smart, it was if he thought it would make him look good to 'his' people. Betray our 20 year allies in the Kurds for anti immigrant cred; checks out.
1) Aid to Ukraine started with the "Ukraine Freedom Support Act of 2014" which also included a lot of sanctions. Again, with the Syria Wagner thing there isn't proof there; at least none that has been presented.
2) Trump was ignoring Russian interference in US elections, refused to act on Russian bounties for killing US servicemen, and again as a reminder threatened to withhold military aid to Ukraine for political dirt. The whole betraying the Kurds also increased Russian clout in the middle east. He was also providing positive press for Putin.
3) Considering the first two has a lot of logical flaws.

The above was off the top of my head. To note in the following I'm leaving out things he "thought about doing / didn't want to do" as well as instances where he said "he was being sarcastic". I'm also leaving out things that are from "former officials" that aren't confirmed. Also, leaving out things that I believe MIGHT have been valid.

Others that stick out to me: During the 2016 campaign he said it was OK if Russia kept Crimea. 2016 R convention blocked language calling for US gov to send aid (this was part of Mueller investigating but determined it wasn't made on behest of Russia). 2017 he gave them highly classified intelligence about ISIS, which is prob valid, but there was concern Russia could figure out source. Trump did say NATO was obsolete. I think I mentioned somewhere above that Trump did ease some sanctions and tried to weaken others. Blocked his administration from giving statement 10th anniversary of Russia-Georgia war. Nov 2018 declined to publicly condemn Russian attack on Ukrainian military vessels. I am mentioning as there is congressional testimony on and it was prepared so all he had to do was read the thing. Called for Russia to be invited back to G7.

As I said, we have very different perceptions of how politics operates. From my perspective, almost everything you listed is senseless American media drama that has no real-world relevance but I understand how you would think otherwise if you live inside this narrative. With respect to some other things you said I am uncertain you fully comprehend what you are saying. For example, to refrain from betraying Kurds would mean to betray Turks; I hope I do not need to explain how incredibly important this country is in the current conflict and, more generally, how key Turkey is for NATO if NATO seriously wants to contain Russia. How you can in the same breath criticize Trump for sucking up to Turkey, being soft on Russia and weakening NATO I do not understand.