Mark Levin, host of Life Liberty and Levin on Sunday nights, spoke on March 19 2023 about the war Russia is waging on Ukraine.
Please listen to his excellent discussion of the subject. He begins talking about Russia and Ukraine at 3.15 and finishes at 14.09:
That link seems to fail as soon as it is started. Let’s try this link:
Couldn’t get this to come up, I’ll try again later…
I have changed the link. Is it working now?
Yes, thanks. While I do respect Levin, I think he says some things that aren’t true.
He states that this dispute is between patriotic Americans and pacifists - this is not true.
Pacifists are against war, period, at any price.
Is Trump a pacifist? I don’t think so - he increased our military budget, to ensure a strong defense for our country, yet succeeded in keeping us out of foreign wars. Biden, on the other hand, as Levin points out, has decreased our military budget, yet he’s pouring money and weapons into this war.
(Not enough, I guess, in Levin’s opinion.)
Levin implies that those who are against this war believe that if Biden stops spending money to defend Ukraine, he’ll spend it defending our own border. That’s also not true - everyone knows Biden wouldn’t do that, and Levin knows we know it, but implies it in order to make his opponents in the argument look stupid.
He’s deliberately obscuring the central point of the objection to defending Ukraine’s borders, while our own borders are being invaded, which is this -
Our own country is being destroyed, and Biden himself is perpetrating it. HE is our #1 enemy, and THIS is our #1 threat, not Russia or even China.
If the U.S. falls under the boot of the totalitarian globalist Police State - and it debatably already has - Ukraine is lost, anyway. At best, it will become a vassal of the globalist dictatorship, just like us.
What good will be a war to “save democracy” then?
Fighting Russia, under the circumstances, is a distraction from the real threat that we now face.
From this perspective, Levin and those who support this war are falling for that distraction and losing sight of the forest for the trees.
I appreciate your arguments. They all make sense, each in itself.
But they do not, I think, cumulatively make a case against supporting Ukraine in its defensive war.
I repeat, NATO cannot just let Russia annex Ukraine. It would mean the end of NATO. Russia could then take what territory it wants in Europe and become a far more formidable (nuclear armed) power confronting the United States. And if the US withdraws from its leadership of NATO, stops providing arms, the organization would not be able to mount any effective defense.
I think Levin also makes a powerful argument FOR the arms designers and manufacturers of America. It is irrelevant that the “military-industrial complex” makes large profits. Without arms makers, what would the US be? What would its dependent allies do against the ambitions of Russia and China? How would the US itself survive?
Do Russia and China not have ambitions to dominate the world? I think they do. And - unlike Klaus Schwab’s super-rich theorists - both of those aggressive countries have the military might, on land on sea and in the air, to fight their way to their terrible goal. But the US does not need the means to defend itself?
I appreciate your arguments, too, and they also make sense. But to the first point, that we cannot let Russia annex Ukraine - no, but that is where negotiations could have, and would be, of use.
And yes, of course we need arms manufacturers.
Where it got out of hand, and turned into a “complex”, was when they started partnering with the government to get us into “forever wars”, just like the pharmacy industry has partnered with the government to create viruses that they can then “cure” with profitable vaccines.
With that reputation, it’s no wonder alot of us don’t trust our government’s motives for escalating this war, rather than attempting to negotiate a settlement.
And yes, Russia and China do have plans to dominate the world - which is another reason getting into a war with Russia was a bad idea - it drove them into an alliance with each other, which makes them both more of a threat.
If the war continues to escalate, we now have the possibility of China joining them in a war with us - an unintended and catastrophic consequence, that could have been avoided by diffusing it before it started, through negotiations.
I understand your reasoning. But even if I were to accept your view of what might have been done, it is not relevant now.
And we are not in fact in a war with Russia - though Russia seems to be trying to provoke us into direct conflict.
I thought Levin very persuasive, but now I see I was wrong about that.
Well, at this point, it may be too late for negotiations anyway. I saw that Kirby is ruling them out, because it would make Putin look good, or something.I think both Putin and Biden have painted themselves into a corner, in which perhaps escalation is the only option.
Or at least continuation. I cannot visualize a likely end to the conflict. Is Russia likely to give up? I don’t think so. If Ukraine is defeated, will NATO just accept its annexation? I don’t think it would.
There is a wrong supposition that negotiations must imply that Russia is allowed to annex Ukraine. That is just not so, and except in frustration would anyone, such as myself, suggest that.
To end a war that is primarily about territory, both sides must lose what they want to keep if there is to be a compromise that allows for settlement and peace, even if neither is truly satisfied. Ukraine cannot win without having the US as a partner in this war, and the longer it goes on, the more the US and nearby nations (NATO) must participate and the more dangerous the war becomes to the world, as other partners come together to defeat Ukraine and the US. They will not join to defeat Ukraine, but to defeat the US. We see partnerships being established on Russia’s side…from Iran/Saudi Arabia to China/India and Syria. I think this indicates danger for the US in a dangerous situation.
If we conclude that it is too late for negotiations, I don’t believe a WW3 will be avoidable…so let it never be too late.
When will it be too late for the other concerned nations of Europe to declare war against the aggressor that they all fear? Why are they letting Ukraine fight their war? If they fear Putin will attack them sooner or later, then why wait any longer to join forces with Zelensky’s military and send Putin’s military home in defeat?
Or does Levin, whom I respect, reason that only a global war between the powerful nations can end the Putin problem?
Is that what we must expect to end this? If not that, then what…how does this end?