woodguru

If, and I know the right has a hard time with hypotheticals because it's so hard to apply a myriad of rhetorical defenses...

Keep it to a simple matter of if Putin wanted Trump to block military aid and he did, would you still support Trump? I am talking proof that this was discussed and Putin pressured Trump not to give the Ukraine tank k**ler weapons and other military support.

If...It comes out that Trump discussed policies with Putin regarding US military aid to the Ukraine, that involved blocking military aid that would obviously be intended to help the Ukraine fight off the Russian mercenary forces that Putin supposedly knew nothing about, and this is why Trump was so fixated on withholding military aid...would this rise to the level of impeachment on the grounds that Trump had acted in a way that was beneficial to Putin at the expense of our ally, the Ukraine?

And I actually can see a right wing twist where the defense would be that, no he didn't block aid to benefit Putin, he did it to pressure them to stop corruption.

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

If? If? If? If?

No question as put has been fully comprehended until it has been fully posed and its assumptions understood.

Sorry, Joe: Team Obama refused to arm Ukraine

In 2014, after Russia annexed Crimea and began arming separatists in eastern Ukraine with tanks, armored vehicles and rocket launchers, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko came to Washington to plead for weapons to defend his country. In an impassioned address to a joint session of Congress — with Biden sitting directly behind him — Poroshenko said his country appreciated the nonlethal assistance he was getting, but declared “one cannot win a war with blankets.”

The Obama-Biden administration was unmoved. The Wall Street Journal reported at the time that “President Barack Obama stuck to his refusal to provide weapons or other lethal military gear to Ukraine.” Why?

Team Obama feared that lethal aid would provoke Moscow.

So what did the administration give him? Instead of rocket-propelled grenades, we provided food rations. As one frustrated former Pentagon official put it at the time, “What kind of message does that send anyway?”

Answer: a message of weakness.

When Trump took office, he delivered a message of strength. In December 2017, the new administration announced that the United States would send the lethal aid to Ukraine that Poroshenko requested and Obama and Biden refused — the sale of $47 million worth of Javelin antitank missiles.

In May 2018, after Ukraine tested its new Javelin missiles, Poroshenko exulted on Twitter “Finally this day has come!” and personally thanked Trump “for supporting Ukraine and adopting a decision to provide Javelin antitank missile systems.”

For Biden to now attack Trump for a temporary delay in a new round of lethal military aid reeks of hypocrisy. It was on Biden’s watch that the United States refused to deliver military aid at all. Yet the same vice president who sat there impassively while Ukraine’s president begged for weapons now dares to cite the Russian threat to Ukraine in castigating Trump?

Talk about chutzpah.

And since Biden raised the Russian threat, let’s recall that the Obama-Biden administration bears much responsibility for the ­annexation of Crimea that necessitated the delivery of lethal aid to Ukraine in the first place. Russia’s military intervention in Ukraine came in the aftermath of the Obama-Biden administration’s failure to enforce its red line against Bashar al-Assad’s use of chemical weapons by Syria.

In March 2013, Biden declared, “Because we recognize the great danger Assad’s chemical and biological arsenals pose to Israel and the United States, to the whole world, we’ve set a clear red line against the use or the t***sfer of those weapons.”

Assad responded by using chemical weapons on innocent civilians not once, but 16 times. And yet Team Obama did nothing, failing to carry out even “unbelievably small” military strikes — a decision Biden publicly defended. “We can easily say we should have bombed and gone in and taken out their air defense system,” Biden said. “Well, you know, big nations can’t bluff.”

Bluff is what Obama and Biden did — and Assad called their bluff. Not only that, they turned to Russia for a face-saving way out, letting Russian President Vladimir Putin broker a phony deal to have Syria disarm. It was one of the most embarrassing foreign-policy debacles of the post-Cold War era.

So it should come as no surprise that, when Team Obama threatened to impose costs on Putin if he invaded Ukraine, the Kremlin called his bluff. Putin knew Biden and his boss didn’t have the will to stand up to him in Ukraine. And he was proved right when they refused to give Ukraine lethal aid for fear of further provoking him.

None of this excuses Trump’s delaying a new round of lethal military aid to Ukraine. But if this military assistance was as vital to countering the Russian threat as Biden says, then it’s fair to ask: Why didn’t the United States provide it when Biden was the Obama administration’s point man on Ukraine?

Chamuco

FACT: Obama REFUSED to supply Ukraine "tank k*****g" weapons while Russia annexed half its' territory. Meanwhile, Trump has consistently opposed and criticized Obama's refusal of those and has DELIVERED them AGAINST the objections of the Russians.

Your false narrative makes me wonder whether you a Russian "asset" or simply one of those "useful i***ts" which the Russians are so fond of.

woodguru

Obama was dealing with a GOP house and senate that was blocking everything, including aid.

Your sentence about none of this excuses Trump blocking military aid is the scope of this issue, not what Biden and Obama did. Obama was involved with sanctions against Russia, and removing Putin from the G8.

Trump takes a far more helpful stance on everything involving Putin. We have set up missile defense systems in the Ukraine, as well as other anti russian defense measures.

Trump aggressively opposed any kind of aid to the Ukraine. As congress authorized military aid and conducted extensive hearings with foreign state department, intelligence, and the pentagon, trump opposed. As they were working on funding for military aid he said he was going to veto it. It passed with veto proof numbers, yet trump obstructed the aid from being delivered in a timely manner to Ukrainian forces that were preparing for an attack with Russian tank buildups. As I recall he slow walked even signing the bill and sat on it for some time.

woodguru

Obama was subject to GOP house and senate controlling military aid. Look at the facts surrounding Trump blocking military aid and you will see that Trump was Putin's useful i***t the way he kept Ukrainian forces from having high tech tank weapons

In a conversation between Trump and Putin about the US giving hundreds of millions worth of high tech weapons that were to be used against Russian invaders, what do you think Putin wanted Trump to do? We can see what Trump did, he slow walked and blocked military aid, and it was 100% against US and European national security interests.

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

You're just running your mouth. Nothing to support what you're saying.

Chamuco

Your first sentence gave you away.

If you're so UNDER-EDUCATED to know the simple fact that the NEITHER the House nor the Senate CAN BLOCK military aid since it is SOLELY the prerogative of the Executive Branch [ie, President]..,
then you should stay out of these important conversations.

You are, obviously, beyond your depth.

Get educated.

rjoeholl

IF....I say IF.....and that's a big IF.....a frog had wings would he bust his ass jumping off a log?

Big dog

👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍

Big dog

👍👍👍👍

Chamuco

"NOTHING" but the historical record..., which "delusional" libs seem consistently intent on ignoring.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/10/trump_gave_ukraine_what_obama_withheld.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/10/08/joe-biden-is-hypocrite-ukraine/

woodguru

Talk about showing pure ignorance. It was the house and senate that authorized the military aid to the Ukraine, it is the house and senate that convened hearings with state department and intelligence experts that convinced them of the urgency involved as a threat to national security. It is trump who was blocking this military aid, and you would be backing a losing bet if you think Putin wasn't talking with Trump concerning US anti tank weapons as he was preparing an attack on the eastern Ukraine.

Trump said he would block military aid, congress told him they had the v**es to override a veto, funding for military aid was passed and trump blocked it without doing it in official channels, this left congress, the state department, and pentagon trying to figure out what the delay was. Meanwhile Russia attacked and forced Ukrainian forces to withdraw.

Lt. Rob Polans ret.

"Obama was dealing with a GOP house and senate that was blocking everything, including aid." This is bs because the second golf bag had any trouble he went to Executive Order and screw the others.

Chamuco

Obviously, you didn't read the articles I provided which tells how things went down in the Ukraine.

Also.., in his role as Commander in Chief.., a president can shift allocated defense funds to projects not specifically authorized by Congress. Many have done so in the past.

To believe that a President can be micromanaged as to Defense Spending in the way you suggest is wholly inaccurate and contrary to the separation of powers as articulated by the Constitution.

I repeat.., get educated.

bggamers Loc: georgia

And who is blocking Trump at this point for 3 yrs trying to seal off our leaky borders that MS13 and terrorist are sliding through where are your precious dems( playing stupid) they have blocked him every time he moves with Obama they were for securing borders but did nothing.What they did put up even I at 68 could get over what they did put up my privacy fence provides better than the damn thing they put up