Trump Wants To Give Putin A Win In His War Against Ukraine

Fearing a race against Joe Biden, Donald Trump asked Ukraine to start an investigation of Mr. Biden. Ukraine refused to illegally interfere in the U.S. election. Now Trump wants to punish Ukraine by giving his buddy Putin a win in the Ukraine war.

The following is part of an op-ed by David French in The New York Times:

He (Trump) refused to say — in the face of repeated questions — that he wanted Ukraine to win its war with Russia. Trump emphasized ending the war over winning the war, a position that can seem reasonable, right until you realize that attempting to force peace at this stage of the conflict would almost certainly cement a Russian triumph. Russia would hold an immense amount of Ukrainian territory and Putin would rightly believe he bested both Ukraine and the United States. He would have rolled the “iron dice” of war and he would have won.

There is no scenario in which a Russian triumph is in America’s best interest. A Russian victory would not only expand Russia’s sphere of influence, it would represent a human rights catastrophe (Russia has engaged in war crimes against Ukraine’s civilian population since the beginning of the war) and threaten the extinction of Ukrainian national identity. It would reset the global balance of power.

In addition, a Russian victory would make World War III more, not less, likely. It would teach Vladimir Putin that aggression pays, that the West’s will is weak and that military conquest is preferable to diplomatic engagement. China would learn a similar lesson as it peers across the strait at Taiwan.

If Vladimir Putin is stopped now — while Ukraine and the West are imposing immense costs in Russian men and matériel — it will send the opposite message, making it far more likely that the invasion of Ukraine is Putin’s last war, not merely his latest.

But that’s not how Trump thinks about Ukraine. He exhibits deep bitterness toward the country, and it was that bitterness that helped expose how dangerous he was well before the Big Lie and Jan. 6. . . .

Trump’s reluctance to say the plain truth — that a Ukrainian victory is in America’s national interest — demonstrates that he is still a prisoner to his own grievances, and there is no one left who can stop him from doing his worst.

Trump Is NOT America's Navalny - But America's Putin

 It took him several days to do it, but Donald Trump has finally remarked on the death of Alexei Navalny. On his Truth Social website, Trump wrote:

“The sudden death of Alexei Navalny has made me more and more aware of what is happening in our Country. It is a slow, steady progression, with CROOKED, Radical Left Politicians, Prosecutors, and Judges leading us down a path to destruction. Open Borders, Rigged Elections, and Grossly Unfair Courtroom Decisions are DESTROYING AMERICA. WE ARE A NATION IN DECLINE, A FAILING NATION!”

He is obviously trying to compare his own legal problems with the plight of Navalny. He wants his followers to believe that he is the Navalny of this country - an innocent man being railroaded by a vicious government. It's ludicrous!

Alexei Navalny ứa an innocent man. His only "crime" was opposing the Putin dictatorship. He gave his freedom, and then his life, to try and establish a true democracy for the people of Russia.

Trump, on the other hand, is far from innocent. Courts have already determined that he is a fraud (using money given to his fake charity and lying about the net worth of his properties to receive low interest loans and tax breaks), a sex abuser (rapist), a defamer (twice), and operating a scam university. He still faces 91 criminal indictments in four different venues - from violating election laws to trying to illegally overthrow a national election and stealing government documents.

Trump has not tried to further democracy in his own country. He has tried to subvert and destroy democracy. It is obscene to compare himself to Navalny.

The truth is that the Russian Trump respects the most is not Navalny - it's Vladimir Putin. Trump admires the dictatorial powers that Putin possesses, and wants the same kind of power for himself. And he could get it by installing only sycophants and yes-men in a new Trump administration - people that would disregard the Constitution to accomplish Trump's desires.

And it's not just the U.S. that would be endangered by a second Trump administration. Trump hates Ukraine and would cut off their aid, allowing Russia to swallow them up. And he hates NATO. John Bolton (a member of the Trump administration) said Trump wanted to withdraw from NATO during his first term, and had to be talked out of it by others. The yes-men in a second Trump term would let him do it - and that would pose a danger for the entire world.

Trump has not made any secret about who he is and what he wants. Voters must turn out in droves next November to prevent him from becoming an American version of Putin. 

Another Trump Term Would Make The World More Dangerous

The world is a very dangerous place, and one of the biggest dangers is Putin's Russia. Putin did not like the breakup of the Soviet Union, and it is his fervent desire to re-establish control over the former Soviet states (and then ultimately the rest of Europe).

One only has to look at his aggressive moves -- first against Georgia, and then against Ukraine. Ukraine has proven to be a difficult task, but he hasn't given up. He's hoping to get some help from the United States after the next election if his protege (Donald Trump) can get elected to a second term.

Trump doesn't like Ukraine, because they refused to instigate a fake investigation into Hunter and Joe Biden. He wanted to use that to smear Biden and win the 2020 election. Now Trump would be happy to let Russia take part or all of Ukraine.

The only thing stopping Putin is NATO. The NATO nations have come to the defense of Ukraine by providing it with weapons and money. Putin would like to see NATO destroyed. He knows he could not defeat a united NATO.

That is another reason that Putin would love to see Trump elected. He knows that the biggest danger to NATO is Donald Trump. Trump doesn't care that NATO is the defender of all Western democracies. He only cares about himself, and would happily destroy NATO if it didn't kowtow to his wishes.

In his first term, he considered withdrawing from NATO. When he had some backlash (even from Republicans), he backed down. But he still threatened to refuse to come to the defense of any NATO nation that refused to bend to his will. 

He said it was only "fair" that other members of NATO budget more money to their militaries. He completely ignored the fact that article 5 of the NATO agreement ( that every NATO nation would come to the defense of any member nation that was attacked) has only been invoked once. That was when the U.S. was attacked on 9/11/2001. The NATO nations joined the United States in going after the attackers in Afghanistan.

True fairness would be to recognize that fact, and to assure the other NATO nations that the U.S. would reciprocate. But Trump doesn't care about real fairness, or about defending the Western democracies (which benefits all democracies, including the U.S.). He only cares about who is willing to kiss his ass and who is not.

A second Trump term would pose a danger to NATO, possibly even destroying it. And that would pose a danger to the world, as Putin (and other dictators) would feel free to attack and engulf their neighbors. 

Trump thinks the United States could stand alone in the world. He is wrong, and his re-election would be disastrous to the entire world. 

Biden Says We Must Not Let Putin And Hamas Win

The following op-ed was written by President Biden in The Washington Post: 

Today, the world faces an inflection point, where the choices we make — including in the crises in Europe and the Middle East — will determine the direction of our future for generations to come.

What will our world look like on the other side of these conflicts?

Will we deny Hamas the ability to carry out pure, unadulterated evil? Will Israelis and Palestinians one day live side by side in peace, with two states for two peoples?

Will we hold Vladimir Putin accountable for his aggression, so the people of Ukraine can live free and Europe remains an anchor for global peace and security?

And the overarching question: Will we relentlessly pursue our positive vision for the future, or will we allow those who do not share our values to drag the world to a more dangerous and divided place?

Both Putin and Hamas are fighting to wipe a neighboring democracy off the map. And both Putin and Hamas hope to collapse broader regional stability and integration and take advantage of the ensuing disorder. America cannot, and will not, let that happen. For our own national security interests — and for the good of the entire world.

The United States is the essential nation. We rally allies and partners to stand up to aggressors and make progress toward a brighter, more peaceful future. The world looks to us to solve the problems of our time. That is the duty of leadership, and America will lead. For if we walk away from the challenges of today, the risk of conflict could spread, and the costs to address them will only rise. We will not let that happen.

That conviction is at the root of my approach to supporting the people of Ukraine as they continue to defend their freedom against Putin’s brutal war.

We know from two world wars in the past century that when aggression in Europe goes unanswered, the crisis does not burn itself out. It draws America in directly. That’s why our commitment to Ukraine today is an investment in our own security. It prevents a broader conflict tomorrow.

We are keeping American troops out of this war by supporting the brave Ukrainians defending their freedom and homeland. We are providing them with weapons and economic assistance to stop Putin’s drive for conquest, before the conflict spreads farther.

The United States is not doing this alone. More than 50 nations have joined us to ensure that Ukraine has what it needs to defend itself. Our partners are shouldering much of the economic responsibility for supporting Ukraine. We have also built a stronger and more united NATO, which enhances our security through the strength of our allies, while making clear that we will defend every inch of NATO territory to deter further Russian aggression.

Our allies in Asia are standing with usas well to support Ukraine and hold Putin accountable, because they understand that stability in Europe and in the Indo-Pacific are inherently connected.

We have also seen throughout history how conflicts in the Middle East can unleash consequences around the globe.

We stand firmly with the Israeli people as they defend themselves against the murderous nihilism of Hamas. On Oct. 7, Hamas slaughtered 1,200 people, including 35 American citizens, in the worst atrocity committed against the Jewish people in a single day since the Holocaust. Infants and toddlers, mothers and fathers, grandparents, people with disabilities, even Holocaust survivors were maimed and murdered. Entire families were massacred in their homes. Young people were gunned down at a music festival. Bodies riddled with bullets and burned beyond recognition. And for over a month, the families of more than 200 hostages taken by Hamas, including babies and Americans, have been living in hell, anxiously waiting to discover whether their loved ones are alive or dead. At the time of this writing, my team and I are working hour by hour, doing everything we can to get the hostages released.

And while Israelis are still in shock and suffering the trauma of this attack, Hamas has promised that it will relentlessly try to repeat Oct. 7. It has said very clearly that it will not stop.

The Palestinian people deserve a state of their own and a future free from Hamas. I, too, am heartbroken by the images out of Gaza and the deaths of many thousands of civilians, including children. Palestinian children are crying for lost parents. Parents are writing their child’s name on their hand or leg so they can be identified if the worst happens. Palestinian nurses and doctors are trying desperately to save every precious life they possibly can, with little to no resources. Every innocent Palestinian life lost is a tragedy that rips apart families and communities.

Our goal should not be simply to stop the war for today — it should be to end the war forever, break the cycle of unceasing violence, and build something stronger in Gaza and across the Middle East so that history does not keep repeating itself.

Just weeks before Oct. 7, I met in New York with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The main subject of that conversation was a set of substantial commitments that would help both Israel and the Palestinian territories better integrate into the broader Middle East. That is also the idea behind the innovative economic corridor that will connect India to Europe through the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Israel, which I announced together with partners at the Group of 20 summit in India in early September. Stronger integration between countries creates predictable markets and draws greater investment. Better regional connection — including physical and economic infrastructure — supports higher employment and more opportunities for young people.

 That’s what we have been working to realize in the Middle East. It is a future that has no place for Hamas’s violence and hate, and I believe that attempting to destroy the hope for that future is one reason that Hamas instigated this crisis.This much is clear: A two-state solution is the only way to ensure the long-term security of both the Israeli and Palestinian people. Though right now it may seem like that future has never been further away, this crisis has made it more imperative than ever.

A two-state solution — two peoples living side by side with equal measures of freedom, opportunity and dignity — is where the road to peace must lead. Reaching it will take commitments from Israelis and Palestinians, as well as from the United States and our allies and partners. That work must start now.

To that end, the United States has proposed basic principles for how to move forward from this crisis, to give the world a foundation on which to build.

To start, Gaza must never again be used as a platform for terrorism. There must be no forcible displacement of Palestinians from Gaza, no reoccupation, no siege or blockade, and no reduction in territory. And after this war is over, the voices of Palestinian people and their aspirations must be at the center of post-crisis governance in Gaza.

As we strive for peace, Gaza and the West Bank should be reunited under a single governance structure, ultimately under a revitalized Palestinian Authority, as we all work toward a two-state solution. I have been emphatic with Israel’s leaders that extremist violence against Palestinians in the West Bank must stop and that those committing the violence must be held accountable. The United States is prepared to take our own steps, including issuing visa bans against extremists attacking civilians in the West Bank.

The international community must commit resources to support the people of Gaza in the immediate aftermath of this crisis, including interim security measures, and establish a reconstruction mechanism to sustainably meet Gaza’s long-term needs. And it is imperative that no terrorist threats ever again emanate from Gaza or the West Bank.

If we can agree on these first steps, and take them together, we can begin to imagine a different future. In the months ahead, the United States will redouble our efforts to establish a more peaceful, integrated and prosperous Middle East — a region where a day like Oct. 7 is unthinkable.

In the meantime, we will continue working to prevent this conflict from spreading and escalating further. I ordered two U.S. carrier groups to the region to enhance deterrence. We are going after Hamas and those who finance and facilitate its terrorism, levying multiple rounds of sanctions to degrade Hamas’s financial structure, cutting it off from outside funding and blocking access to new funding channels, including via social media. I have also been clear that the United States will do what is necessary to defend U.S. troops and personnel stationed across the Middle East — and we have responded multiple times to the strikes against us.

I also immediately traveled to Israel — the first American president to do so during wartime — to show solidarity with the Israeli people and reaffirm to the world that the United States has Israel’s back. Israel must defend itself. That is its right. And while in Tel Aviv, I also counseled Israelis against letting their hurt and rage mislead them into making mistakes we ourselves have made in the past.

From the very beginning, my administration has called for respecting international humanitarian law, minimizing the loss of innocent lives and prioritizing the protection of civilians. Following Hamas’s attack on Israel, aid to Gaza was cut off, and food, water and medicine reserves dwindled rapidly. As part of my travel to Israel, I worked closely with the leaders of Israel and Egypt to reach an agreement to restart the delivery of essential humanitarian assistance to Gazans. Within days, trucks with supplies again began to cross the border. Today, nearly 100 aid trucks enter Gaza from Egypt each day, and we continue working to increase the flow of assistance manyfold. I’ve also advocated for humanitarian pauses in the conflict to permit civilians to depart areas of active fighting and to help ensure that aid reaches those in need. Israel took the additional step to create two humanitarian corridors and implement daily four-hour pauses in the fighting in northern Gaza to allow Palestinian civilians to flee to safer areas in the south.

This stands in stark opposition to Hamas’s terrorist strategy: hide among Palestinian civilians. Use children and innocents as human shields. Position terrorist tunnels beneath hospitals, schools, mosques and residential buildings. Maximize the death and suffering of innocent people — Israeli and Palestinian. If Hamas cared at all for Palestinian lives, it would release all the hostages, give up arms, and surrender the leaders and those responsible for Oct. 7.

As long as Hamas clings to its ideology of destruction, a cease-fire is not peace. To Hamas’s members, every cease-fire is time they exploit to rebuild their stockpile of rockets, reposition fighters and restart the killing by attacking innocents again. An outcome that leaves Hamas in control of Gaza would once more perpetuate its hate and deny Palestinian civilians the chance to build something better for themselves.

And here at home, in moments when fear and suspicion, anger and rage run hard, we have to work even harder to hold on to the values that make us who we are. We’re a nation of religious freedom and freedom of expression. We all have a right to debate and disagree and peacefully protest, but without fear of being targeted at schools or workplaces or elsewhere in our communities.

In recent years, too much hate has been given too much oxygen, fueling racism and an alarming rise in antisemitism in America. That has intensified in the wake of the Oct. 7 attacks. Jewish families worry about being targeted in school, while wearing symbols of their faith on the street or otherwise going about their daily lives. At the same time, too many Muslim Americans, Arab Americans and Palestinian Americans, and so many other communities, are outraged and hurting, fearing the resurgence of the Islamophobia and distrust we saw after 9/11.

We can’t stand by when hate rears its head. We must, without equivocation, denounce antisemitism, Islamophobia, and other forms of hate and bias. We must renounce violence and vitriol and see each other not as enemies but as fellow Americans.

In a moment of so much violence and suffering — in Ukraine, Israel, Gaza and so many other places — it can be difficult to imagine that something different is possible. But we must never forget the lesson learned time and again throughout our history: Out of great tragedy and upheaval, enormous progress can come. More hope. More freedom. Less rage. Less grievance. Less war. We must not lose our resolve to pursue those goals, because now is when clear vision, big ideas and political courage are needed most. That is the strategy that my administration will continue to lead — in the Middle East, Europe and around the globe. Every step we take toward that future is progress that makes the world safer and the United States of America more secure.

Trump, Netanyahu, And Putin Have Hurt Their Own Nations

The following is part of a post by Robert Reich:

It has been a horrific week. The gruesome slayings of Israelis by Hamas militants are ricocheting around the world, testing the skeins of civility even on the streets of New York. Meanwhile, Putin’s brutality continues to wrench the heart of Europe.

America’s capacity to govern itself is also being tested. The U.S. House of Representatives continues without a speaker — the person essential for the chamber (and therefore much of the rest of government) to function, and who is next in line after the vice president in presidential succession. . . .

In late September, Trump urged House Republicans to shut the government if they weren’t able to defund Trump’s criminal trials. “Republicans in Congress can and must defund all aspects of Crooked Joe Biden’s weaponized Government,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social media site, calling it “the last chance to defund these political prosecutions against me and other Patriots.”

I thought of Trump and this mash of self-serving Republicans when I read Israeli historian Yuval Noah Narari’s piece in yesterday’s Washington Post, seeking to explain why Israel was unprepared for Saturday’s onslaught.

Narari wrote that Israel has been: 

“governed by a populist strongman … who is a public-relations genius but an incompetent prime minister. He has repeatedly preferred his personal interests over the national interest and has built his career on dividing the nation against itself. He has appointed people to key positions based on loyalty more than qualifications, took credit for every success while never taking responsibility for failures, and seemed to give little importance to either telling or hearing the truth.

The coalition [he] established has been by far the worst. It is an alliance of messianic zealots and shameless opportunists, who ignored [the nation’s] many problems — including the deteriorating security situation — and focused instead on grabbing unlimited power for themselves. In pursuit of this goal, they adopted extremely divisive policies, spread outrageous conspiracy theories about state institutions that oppose their policies, and labeled the country’s serving elites as “deep state” traitors.”

The point is this: Whether named Netanyahu, Trump, or Putin, when authoritarian leaders gain power by dividing the public, spreading baseless conspiracy theories, and accusing opponents of being “deep state” traitors, they weaken a society’s capacities to protect itself from all sorts of threats. 

They undermine the public good, which is the wellspring of a society’s true strength.

Netanyahu, Trump, and Putin have imperiled each of their nations by filling them with lies, paranoia, and distrust.

The "Grand Old Party" Is Becoming "Gaga Over Putin"

The following post is by Dan Rather and Elliot Kirschner: 

There’s a faction within the party, including its leader and likely presidential nominee, who have a soft spot for a murderous autocrat who despises freedom, peace, and global stability. These days, the acronym GOP could also stand for Gaga Over Putin. 

One of the enduring puzzles about Donald Trump is why he has been such a Putin fanboy over the years. The speculation has run rampant, from an affinity for preening wannabe tough guys, to financial entanglements, to even blackmail. To date, nothing substantive has been proven, but Trump’s words and actions speak for themselves. He has never wanted to challenge Putin. He cowers in deference (remember the notorious Helsinki summit). And when it comes to Ukraine, it’s pretty clear that Trump would sell out that country and the rest of a free and democratic Europe to the imperial ambitions of a Russian tyrant. 

History and life are full of tumult and change, but there are a few precious things you think you can count on — the sun rising in the east, gravity, and matching socks disappearing in your laundry. There was a time when you could have added Republicans railing against Russian aggression to the list. But that now seems as permanent as a Blockbuster Video rental store — something you can’t imagine disappearing until it does. 

To be fair, there are many Republican elected officials who have been staunch defenders of Ukraine and the need for American military and diplomatic power to stand up to and thwart Putin’s ambitions. In the last Republican presidential debate — one notably skipped by Trump — former Vice President Mike Pence and former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley spoke forcefully and eloquently about the horrors of Putin and the need for the United States to back Ukraine. Perhaps there is no issue that splits the Republican Party as much as this one. 

But it is also clear that the most vociferous Putin critics in the Republican Party represent the old guard, the people who, when they think of a president who embodied their ideals, picture Reagan, not Trump. Some of those might still exist in the Senate and Washington conservative think tanks, but the energy from Trump and his political foot soldiers is in the opposite direction. 

And this isn’t just about rhetoric. One of the big fights in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives swirls around Russia and Ukraine. The far right-wingers in the Republican caucus want to stop funding Ukraine. It’s a key part of a series of hard-line budget demands that could lead to a U.S. government shutdown. 

When Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky came to Washington this week after traveling to New York for the United Nations General Assembly, he met with President Biden and received a warm bipartisan reception in the Senate. Speaker McCarthy declined to hold a similar meeting for members of the House. “Is Zelensky elected to Congress? Is he our president? I don’t think I have to commit anything,” McCarthy sniped as he called future Ukrainian aid into question. 

 

Putin himself hasn’t been shy about weighing in on American politics. It’s clear whom he’s endorsing for president of the United States. “Everything that is happening with Trump, this is persecution for political reasons of one’s political rival,” Putin recently said of America’s most famous criminal defendant. He continued that the prosecutions are evidence of “the rottenness of the American political system, which cannot pretend to teach others about democracy.” This is something coming from a president who not only prosecutes but poisons (and otherwise murders) his political rivals.

 

Putin has likely come to the conclusion that his self-preservation could very well depend on Trump's winning in 2024. In that way, he shares a common cause with the ex-president. Trump knows that if he loses at the polls, it greatly increases the chances he could lose his freedom and go to prison. Putin knows that if Trump loses, he could lose even more than that.

 

Do Trump and Putin ever second guess their choices? If Trump hadn’t run for president, he could likely have lived the rest of his days luxuriating in his louche lifestyle. If Putin hadn’t invaded Ukraine, he could have escaped a showdown with the West, NATO expansion, and becoming a pariah on the world stage begging North Korea for help.

 

But that’s not where we are. Trump, Putin, and a sizable wing of the Republican Party are swept up in each other. A grand old party, if your idea of a party is cheering the end of freedom and democracy.

Putin Uses U.S. Culture War To Appeal To Right-Wingers

Putin knows he has followers among GOP right-wingers, and he's trying to grow their numbers by siding with them in the U.S. culture war. Here's part of how E.J. Dionne Jr. describes it in The Washington Post:

Here’s a scoop for you: Vladimir Putin is sounding like someone who wants to enter the 2024 Republican presidential primaries.

How else do you explain that in the middle of his bellicose speechTuesday promising success in his assault on Ukraine, the Russian dictator fired a series of heat-seeking verbal missiles into our culture wars.

“Look at what they’ve done to their own people,” he said of us Westerners. “They’re destroying family, national identity, they are abusing their children. Even pedophilia is announced as a normal thing in the West.” Never mind that Russia is a world leader in sex trafficking.

Putin didn’t stop there. In one rather convoluted passage, he came out against same-sex marriage, backed off a bit, and then doubled down:

“And they’re recognizing same-sex marriages,” he said. “That’s fine that they’re adults. They’ve got the right to live their life. And we always, we’re very tolerant about this in Russia. Nobody is trying to enter private lives of people, and we’re not going to do this.”

Well, not quite, but he pressed on: “However, we need to tell them, but look at the scriptures of any religion in the world. Everything is said in there. And one of the things is that family is a union of a man and a woman.”

Among his enemies, Putin charged, “even the sacred texts are subjected to doubt.” Also, watch out, Britain: The “Anglican Church is planning to consider the idea of a gender-neutral God,” Putin mourned. “What can you say here? Millions of people in the West understand that they are being led to spiritual destruction.”

It has become a habit to cast the struggle over Ukraine in Cold War terms. Maybe that’s natural, given Putin’s old job as a KGB agent and his determination to expand Russia’s imperial reach to something closer to the hegemony once enjoyed by the old Soviet Union.

But it’s closer to the truth to see Putin as trying to build a right-wing nationalist international movement (no pun intended). And it’s obvious that his embrace of social and religious traditionalism is aimed at winning over right-wing opinion in the democracies and splitting the traditional right.

You don’t have to watch Fox News commentators waxing warm about the Russian president to see that this strategy is working. Opposition to helping Ukraine is growing among rank-and-file Republicans.

A Pew Research survey in January found that 40 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents said that the United States was providing too much help to Ukraine, up from 32 percent in the fall and 9 percent last March. A Jan. 27-Feb. 1 Washington Post/ABC News pollfound 50 percent of Republicans saying that the United States was doing too much to support Ukraine, up from 18 percent in April. . . .

The much larger problem is for U.S. foreign policy. For the medium term, enough Republicans share Biden’s view of the Russian threat and Ukraine’s heroism to maintain assistance to the war effort.

But Putin is very shrewd about opinion on the right end of politics — in the United States and in Western Europe, too. He is counting on a backlash against social liberalism and the idea of a “gender-neutral” God to rustle up support for ungodly aggression. 

There Is A Pro-Putin Cult Within The Republican Party

The following is part of an op-ed by Paul Krugman in The New York Times: 

How can any American, a citizen of a nation that holds itself up as a beacon of freedom, not be rooting for Ukraine in this war?

Yet there are significant factions in U.S. politics — a small group on the left, a much more significant bloc on the right — that not only oppose Western support for Ukraine but also clearly want to see Russia win. And my question, on the first anniversary of Russia’s invasion, is what lies behind right-wing support for Vladimir Putin? . . .

Putin, by contrast, very much is the subject of a personality cult not just in Russia but also on the American right and has been for years. And it’s a fairly creepy cult at that. For example, back in 2014 a National Review columnist contrasted Putin’s bare-chested horseback riding with President Barack Obama’s “metrosexual golf get-ups.”

Until the invasion of Ukraine, Putinphilia also went hand in hand with extravagant praise for Russia’s supposed military effectiveness. Most famously, in 2021 Ted Cruz circulated a video contrasting a Russian military recruitment ad featuring a muscular man doing manly stuff with a U.S. ad highlighting the diversity of Army recruits. “Perhaps a woke, emasculated military isn’t the best idea,” Cruz declared.

What was the basis for this worship of Putinism? I’d argue that many people on the right equate being powerful with being a swaggering tough guy and sneer at anything — like intellectual openness and respect for diversity — that might interfere with the swagger. Putin was their idea of what a powerful man should look like, and Russia, with its muscleman military vision, their idea of a powerful country.

It should have been obvious from the beginning that this worldview was all wrong. National power in the modern world rests mainly on economic strength and technological capacity, not military prowess.

But then came the invasion, and it turned out that Putin’s not-woke, unemasculated Russia isn’t even very good at waging war.

Why has Russia’s military failed so spectacularly? Because modern wars aren’t won by strutting guys flexing their biceps. They’re won mainly through logistics, technology and intelligence (in both the military and the ordinary senses) — things, it turns out, that Russia does badly and Ukraine does surprisingly well. (It’s not just Western weapons, although these have been awesomely effective; the Ukrainians have also shown a real talent for MacGyvering solutions to their military needs.) . . .

The key to understanding right-wingers’ growing Ukraine rage is that Russia’s failures don’t just show that a leader they idolized has feet of clay. They also show that their whole tough-guy view about the nature of power is wrong. And they’re having a hard time coping.

This explains why leading Putinists in the United States keep insisting that Ukraine is actually losing. Putin is “winning the war in Ukraine,” declared Tucker Carlson on Aug. 29, just days before several Ukrainian victories. There’s still a lot of hype about a huge Russian offensive this winter; the truth, however, is that this offensive is already underway, but as one Ukrainian official put it, it has achieved so little “that not everyone even sees it.”

None of this means that Russia can’t eventually conquer Ukraine. If it does, however, it will, in part, be because America’s Putin fans force a cutoff of crucial aid. And if this happens, it will be because the U.S. right can’t stand the idea of a world in which woke doesn’t mean weak and men who pose as tough guys are actually losers.