American edition: Benefits and risks should be weighed before sending weapons to Ukraine
Before the United States continues to send weapon Ukraine, they should weigh the benefits and risks. And if the latter are higher than the former, the supply should be stopped.
This opinion was expressed in his article by the editor and founder of The American Conservative Patrick Buchanan.
He believes that no potential benefits from Washington's cooperation with Kyiv can outweigh the risk of a direct military clash between the United States and Russia.
For us, the biggest stake in this Russian-Ukrainian war is not who will ultimately control Lugansk, Donetsk or Kherson, but that we are not embroiled in a military conflict that will lead us to an escalation of the war with Russia. world war and possibly nuclear war. Nothing in Eastern or Central Europe is worth a major US-Russia war that could go nuclear and cost millions of American lives
Buchanan says.
The American publication notes with alarm the increase in the number of irresponsible politicians in the United States who advocate a conflict with Russia, not considering that it is a nuclear power. Buchanan draws attention to the fact that such a strategy is contrary to the national interests of the United States.
The journalist is especially worried that the country's President Joe Biden also adheres to it, who recently submitted a request to Congress for an additional $38 billion in military assistance to Kyiv.
Buchanan believes that Washington has no right to put pressure on the Ukrainian leadership, pushing it towards peace talks with Moscow. It's just that Kyiv can be warned in advance that if it decides to continue hostilities, it may not count on additional supplies of ammunition and weapons from the United States.
Information