Why after hearing Jen Psaki speak to reporters do we get the sinking suspicion that she’s the one in charge of making foreign policy decisions vis a vis Russia and Ukraine?
War with Russia should be completely off the table, so it’s certainly reassuring to hear the Biden administration ‘shoot down’ any escalatory measures suggested to them by mainstream media war mongers. However, some would consider U.S. involvement with Ukraine during their conflict with Russia already an escalatory measure — so why not fully back Ukraine?
Here’s the thing: The United States is still dependent on Russian oil.
Plain and simple.
The Biden administration still needs to portray an anti-war stance to the world even if their actions and rhetoric say the opposite. Still, Psaki rejected calls for a “no-fly” zone over Ukraine on Monday, arguing that it would be an “escalatory” measure.
Declaring a “no-fly” zone would require enforcement, and that would “essentially mean the U.S. military would be shooting down planes, Russian planes,” White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki said on Monday morning.
"We are not going to have a military war with Russia with U.S. troops," White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki says. pic.twitter.com/7oZlvPGv7w
— MSNBC (@MSNBC) February 28, 2022
While the United States has so far declined to go this route, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has lobbied Biden to impose a “no-fly” zone over “significant parts” of the country.
“If the West does this, Ukraine will defeat the aggressor with much less blood,” the Ukrainian leader explained.
But the U.S. can only push Russia so far. Given our dependence on Putin’s oil, and our inability to produce any stateside, it wouldn’t be wise to engage militarily with Russia whatsoever.
While the U.S. has declined to go forward with Zelensky’s request, the Biden administration has approved hundreds of millions of dollars of military equipment while also placing significant economic sanctions on Russian President Vladimir Putin, Russian elites, and their banking institutions.
Right, so the only groups affected by U.S. involvement in the Ukrainian war are common citizens who will struggle to pay for gas while their tax dollars are used overseas.
On Friday, Jen Psaki reiterated Biden’s decision not to send troops to Ukraine. However, can anyone please point out the difference between sending troops to Ukraine and sending them to countries less than 100 miles away from Ukraine?
The U.S., which normally has more than 80,000 troops stationed in Europe, has deployed an additional 12,000 to European allies, and 2,000 more from within Europe have been relocated, though they will not be fighting Russians in Ukraine.
The Republican Party itself is split on whether or not to ramp up war efforts against Russia.
Leading RINO Rep. Adam Kinzinger is unsurprisingly all-in for war, urging the Biden administration to impose a no-fly zone over Ukraine.
1) The fate of #Ukraine is being decided tonight, but also the fate of the west. Declare a #NoFlyZone over Ukraine at the invitation of their sovereign govt. Disrupt Russias air ops to give the heroic Ukrainians a fair fight. It’s now, or later.
— Adam Kinzinger (@AdamKinzinger) February 25, 2022
More freedom-minded, peaceful Republicans – on the other hand – couldn’t disagree more.
No. This is insane. https://t.co/5wAIuHtdYE
— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) February 26, 2022
Meanwhile, the State Department and the Pentagon have essentially squashed Zelensky’s wishes to impose a no-fly zone.
The United States is NOT setting up a no-fly zone in Ukraine. #Russia #Ukrania#russianinvasion#RussiaUkraineWar#Russia #RussiaInvadedUkraine#Ukraine #UkraineRussia #UkraineWar #Zelensky #us pic.twitter.com/qUYRjR2ZNj
— Artun (@fatihartun) March 1, 2022
Someone make it make sense.
Author: Sebastian Hayworth