Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons with a promise of protection.

[Lady Freedom Returns]

So why is the free world not keeping our part of the deal? I'm setting here and have seen footage of an older man in a car get ran over by a tank. People running from the terrorist aka the Russian Army.

I know, I know! We just got out of a 20 war. But we were a big part of that promise for Ukraine's nuclear weapons!

We made a promise!

[PortTack]

1. You are so correct! Right now thou President Zelensky has said he doesn't want NATO or US boots

On the ground, and with good reason.

If the US and Russia square off over the country of Ukraine it will be a bombed out shell, or possibly worse

[PoliticAverse]

2. It turns out one of the signatories of the promise broke the promise - oops.

And the worst part is the promise breaker has nuclear weapons.

[machoneman]

3. Glad you mentioned that little factoid! We and the UK took them all in....

...and IIRC, the nuclear materials were shipped here for re-use or disposal. Too bad. A couple of nuke missiles either held as a threat or launched on Moscow would serve those evil bastards.

Oh, and for those who think how terrible....do you think for a second that if the Ukraine invaded Russian soil things would be different? Methinks not.

[okaawhatever]

7. Ukraine had the nukes but not the controls to launch them. nt

[ck4829]

4. K&R

[okaawhatever]

5. IIRC the promises in the Budapest Memorandum only

Included protection in the event nukes were used against it. The US, UK & Russia agreed to respect their sovereignty and not attack them, but, you know….Putin.

[Shipwack]

6. I agree completely... Unfortunately...

All of our options suck.

I don’t want to put our troops in harm’s way, but that is the only thing that can stop Putin right now. Sanctions will hurt him, eventually, but not in time to help Ukraine. Even if we just launch air strikes and missiles, that will escalate things and get us involved in a hot war with Russia. Plus, Biden has taken that option off the table, so sending in troops now would anger many.

On the other hand, if we don’t materially support Ukraine, Putin wins. He gets access to a huge amount of natural resources, and a democracy in the region is extinguished. Plus, this will serve as a warning to other countries in the region to not aspire to freedom.

Additionally, the reputation of the US (which was beginning to improve with Trump gone) will be shot. Republicans, Democrats, it doesn’t matter whose in charge, the US can’t be trusted to fulfill its promises.

The only bright spot (for the rest of the world, but not Ukraine) is that the Ukrainians don’t have nukes. They wouldn’t have saved them, and would leave just a bunch of radioactive craters on both sides of the border… Well, only around the border if we were lucky and things didn’t escalate.

Of course, maybe if they still had nuked Putin would not have attacked in the first place.

[kelly1mm]

8. I mentioned this in the prior Russian invasion of Crimea and was called a 'warmonger' right here on

DU. While at least some seem to acknowledge our promises apparently nobody wants to actually deploy force to fulfill those promises. The moral of this story is to 1) NEVER give up nukes if you have them and 2) develop nukes as fast as possible to guarantee your nations territorial integrity.

[TomCADem]

9. Think of All The Republicans Who Voted Against Impeaching Trump...

...for withholding millions in military aid to Ukraine unless they aided him in his re-election effort.