I guess I understand the sentiment, but I think there is value to naming and shaming, and there are (in my view) plenty of them who will have some sense of this.

74m voters now have to live with Trump's substantial contribution to the present Ukraine situation. I'm sure many of them are lining up and trying to think of how concerned they are about the Ukrainians, but their own gross contribution to the present situation must be apparent to many of them. Even if the vast majority will never once admit that contribution, I think calling it out can ultimately impact some of them for the better.

@kmaz Who pushed NATO eastward?

@yvilletom

Ah, so you'd like to drag this into "Dems have plenty to live with also?" Sure. It does not change the bizarre situation of Trump's disgusting contributions to this situation, one iota, except you're now employing the tired usual "but the Dems can always be painted (whether accurately or not) as equally bad, or worse, so we will never discuss what Trump did" argument.

@kmaz NATO is bigger than Trump, Repubs and Dems combined.

What do you know of NATO’s early commitment to not add nations that are closer to Russia?

What do you know of capitalism’s century-long opposition to communism, and the desire of each to destroy the other?

IMO, capitalism will destroy communism. Communism’s internal tyranny is fatal to communism.

@yvilletom

Tom, what's your point? Please make it.

@kmaz My point is that your long and complex argument is flawed

@yvilletom

Thanks, I'm aware that the problems with Ukraine and Russia go well beyond Trump and the Republicans. I've made that point myself here on these boards. A useful lens to look through, in my view, for understanding this crisis, is this somewhat unpopular one which emphasizes some broader non-partisan questions around US policy on Ukraine:

[newyorker.com]
Q. & A.
Why John Mearsheimer Blames the U.S. for the Crisis in Ukraine
For years, the political scientist has claimed that Putin’s aggression toward Ukraine is caused by Western intervention. Have recent events changed his mind?
By Isaac Chotiner
March 1, 2022

Notwithstanding that point, and notwithstanding any debate around what is the right overall lens to use to look at the matters, it is I think critical to be able to carve out a narrower point that the Trump years were years in which we had a President who:

a) was so blatantly corrupt and cynical in his treatment of the Ukraine situation that he was impeached over it.
b) was beholden, in broad daylight, to a Russian ruler and who used the mechanisms of the government to quash taxpayers' attempts to investigate and report on this. There were arguably massive long-term consequences of this including emboldening that Russian Autocrat
c) and who was widely supported in these matters, by dozens of millions of people, and their elected representatives in Congress.

There were consequences to the choices we US citizens made, as a whole, to keep that corrupt former President in Power for a time (our failure to remove him from office once impeached), to let him extort Ukraine during his idiotic political battle, to waste time we might have spent actually getting real about our Ukraine policy, to empower and embolden a de facto Russian dictator. If we US citizens want to have honest conversations now about what we have done wrong as to Russia and Ukraine, and what we can do going forward to address it, then it should be possible to lay out that the Trump years were a disaster on this matter, and that Trump supporters by the millions contributed to this in a way that should give them pause if some of them now want to get into a lather about how much they support the people of Ukraine. I made clear, from my use of the word "more" in the first sentence of this topic summary, that I did not and do not see the issues during the Trump years as the only problem. They aren't, by a longshot.

None of my own point is any more complicated than it needs to be. It is not clear why you are busying yourself muddying the waters of discussion around an overdue point, but in my opinion you are.

@kmaz Yes. Long and complex.

@yvilletom

If you have an actual useful comment to make, then why not just make it in a clear way? It's a bit needlessly rude, in my view, to claim you have some disagreement, to decline to state (when asked) what the disagreement is, and when someone tries to turn the other cheek and tries at least to guess at the disagreement and provide answers, .... then to complain of length and complexity.

We (in this sentence, everyone on Earth, but particularly the US) are up against a situation where there is an insane (or at least messed-up in a way I don't know how to describe) nuclear-armed autocrat, at one time rumored to be one of the wealthiest people in the world, making war on 40m+ Ukrainians. We have the fact that this same autocrat has a recent history of manipulating the American electorate and helping to place a semi-puppet in the Presidency. This puppet then so badly interfered with Congress's attempts to aid Ukraine years ago that he was impeached on that issue. It is well worth highlighting, in my opinion, that this President was supported by millions of Americans in this behavior (i.e.: when push came to shove, they opposed his removal from office) , and now many of those same Americans claim they are concerned for the people of Ukraine.