Trump is in over his head except he doesn’t think so which makes his incompetence that much more dangerous! I don’t think Marco Rubio has the courage to tell him where his boss is deficient (unlike when John Bolton was in the room). While I believe Trump does want the war to end, it is only as in element of his daily television show called The Trump Presidency.
This interview is both timely and important, covering nearly all possible technical aspects and future projections. The introduction to Putin’s historical perspective is also quite dramatic. The discussion of several key sanctions, such as those involving oil and banks, is highly professional.
One term, in particular, seems crucial: “pressure.” After all, whether the goal is to end a war or to win a war, the U.S. stance is extremely important. Therefore, the author’s early endorsement of President Trump appears very deliberate. Regardless of how highly Trump may have previously regarded Putin, now, as an advocate for a ceasefire, failing to establish a clear positional objective in advance would undoubtedly give opponents an opening.
For example, whose territory is being swapped? Only by precisely defining the mission’s value and position does the Russia-Ukraine ceasefire negotiation gain historical significance, rather than ending the war merely for the sake of ending it.
Ambassador McFaul, What you set forth makes perfect sense, but demonstrably Trump isn’t buying it, even though it would give him the leverage he needs to bring this war to an end. Using leverage to bring people, organizations and states into submission has been Trump’s stock-in-trade these first months of his second term. But he will not apply it to Putin. Why? Whatever it is, Putin has something Trump wants and really badly for 9 years. Clearly he knows - and Putin knows - that exercising leverage over Putin will not work. Ukrainian, indeed European interests, not to mention the Rules Based Order of the past 80 year stand in the way of achieving Trump’s Russian objective. Moreover, the Ukrainian people had the temerity to revolt against Russia and demand that their sovereignty and desired alignment with the West be respected, precipitating this disruption. And don’t forget Zelensky stood up to Trump and refused to frame the Bidens, which lead to the ignominy of impeachment, a stain before history on Trump’s would-be-vaunted legacy. So it would be perfectly OK with Trump if Ukraine were subsumed in the new Russian Imperial Revival and Zelensky wound up in a Russian Gulag or even dead. That would send the world a message: there is a New World Order and Trump is boss.
Trump has not given any indication that he would impose more sanctions or help Ukraine. Is there reason to think he will on Friday? The whole plan on Friday---location (appalling) and lack of preparation---are very worrisome.
What do you think about an armistice instead of a ceasefire? Like Korea, where fighting stops, lines are drawn, and each side must respect the other's territory forever. Of course it would require a NATO peace force to monitor the border drawn, but it might work and save lives, even if Ukrainians were not happy about losing territory in the east and Crimea. Would be interested in your thoughts?
We are all so on edge. Thanks for your input.
Trump is in over his head except he doesn’t think so which makes his incompetence that much more dangerous! I don’t think Marco Rubio has the courage to tell him where his boss is deficient (unlike when John Bolton was in the room). While I believe Trump does want the war to end, it is only as in element of his daily television show called The Trump Presidency.
This interview is both timely and important, covering nearly all possible technical aspects and future projections. The introduction to Putin’s historical perspective is also quite dramatic. The discussion of several key sanctions, such as those involving oil and banks, is highly professional.
One term, in particular, seems crucial: “pressure.” After all, whether the goal is to end a war or to win a war, the U.S. stance is extremely important. Therefore, the author’s early endorsement of President Trump appears very deliberate. Regardless of how highly Trump may have previously regarded Putin, now, as an advocate for a ceasefire, failing to establish a clear positional objective in advance would undoubtedly give opponents an opening.
For example, whose territory is being swapped? Only by precisely defining the mission’s value and position does the Russia-Ukraine ceasefire negotiation gain historical significance, rather than ending the war merely for the sake of ending it.
Ambassador McFaul, What you set forth makes perfect sense, but demonstrably Trump isn’t buying it, even though it would give him the leverage he needs to bring this war to an end. Using leverage to bring people, organizations and states into submission has been Trump’s stock-in-trade these first months of his second term. But he will not apply it to Putin. Why? Whatever it is, Putin has something Trump wants and really badly for 9 years. Clearly he knows - and Putin knows - that exercising leverage over Putin will not work. Ukrainian, indeed European interests, not to mention the Rules Based Order of the past 80 year stand in the way of achieving Trump’s Russian objective. Moreover, the Ukrainian people had the temerity to revolt against Russia and demand that their sovereignty and desired alignment with the West be respected, precipitating this disruption. And don’t forget Zelensky stood up to Trump and refused to frame the Bidens, which lead to the ignominy of impeachment, a stain before history on Trump’s would-be-vaunted legacy. So it would be perfectly OK with Trump if Ukraine were subsumed in the new Russian Imperial Revival and Zelensky wound up in a Russian Gulag or even dead. That would send the world a message: there is a New World Order and Trump is boss.
Trump has not given any indication that he would impose more sanctions or help Ukraine. Is there reason to think he will on Friday? The whole plan on Friday---location (appalling) and lack of preparation---are very worrisome.
That may be true. Please do not write/say it. Malign forces will take comfort from it.
What do you think about an armistice instead of a ceasefire? Like Korea, where fighting stops, lines are drawn, and each side must respect the other's territory forever. Of course it would require a NATO peace force to monitor the border drawn, but it might work and save lives, even if Ukrainians were not happy about losing territory in the east and Crimea. Would be interested in your thoughts?
good idea
How do I hear the interview if today. 8/13/25 . I am a member, unfortunately I thought it was at 11:58 pt of course not… so is it available ???