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 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 into 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.
Someone make it make sense.
Author: Monica Hedren
To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected]tent.ad.
Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that Content.ad always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More