I will probably get flamed for this because a lot of people will disagree, but just remember...Diversity Is Our Strength!

Okay, so I hope Ukraine wins the war. I really do. Russian aggression is bad, particularly the armed type. And Putin has a track record of taking land there and in Georgia and in the Crimea. But he's not taking land in Poland or Nebraska. On the contrary, Zelensky is taking our money from all 50 US states. And because of that, we're getting ever closer to becoming personally involved in a war that doesn't make America safer when we participate in it.

I'm tired of it. To date, we have handed over or committed to $113 billion in cash and wares to this man. We've given cash for Zelensky to make payroll for his government employees, but in military wares this is what it looks like. There's been no accounting of it, and for all the help we've given the Ukranians, they have only managed to avoid complete and total collapse. They haven't won anything. And unless NATO comes to aid the Ukrainians in force, they probably won't. It's an open and ongoing sore. Russia has more men and more stuff. They can keep this up until their population gets tired of it or until they run out of North Koreans. Who knows which will come first?

Zelensky certainly wants to save his country, but I really don't think he can win by set-piece battles. The Russians are good at layered defenses (Kursk), and I don't think the Yellow and Blue is ever going to dislodge them no matter how much money and equipment we give them. That sort of fighting requires soldiers. Lots and lots of soldiers. If the Ukrainians adopted a long war of attrition (Afghanistan), they might be more successful, but giving them 20 tanks here and 10 F-16s there won't change much because the numbers just aren't there. Russia has more stuff and more people to throw into the fight no matter how much material we give them.

Sure they're losing hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded, much more than we lost in a decade's worth of fighting in Vietnam, but until Russians at home really get sick of the body bags and raise a collective voice in meaningful protest, Putin will probably just continue to do what Russian leaders have historically done. Throw lots of people at the war without much regard for their lives. No wonder he's found kindred spirits within the North Korean People's Liberation Front Anti-Colonialist Revolutionary Anti-American Pig Dog Army. They drink from the same pitcher of Kool-Aid.

I don't want to give the Ukraine another dime. We've had scum like Pelosi and Schumer promise Zelensky arms, money and support until the Twelfth of Forever. Now when he comes to Washington with his arm out and palm up, he literally demands that we hand him cash... as if we owe it to him. I think this is a losing proposition for us because our stake in the fight is not nearly as big as our own problems at home.

Critics of this piece might say that I am an apologist for the Russians or that I want to see Putin's armies win so that he can go on to swallow up NATO, or whatever. And no, I'm not saying anything like that. What I am saying is that we have done more than what can be reasonably expected in our support for Zelensky for the past two years and enough is enough.

And enough is enough because:

a) This is first and foremost a European problem. They need to be taking the lead in the problem-solving department. They have to live on the same landmass as Zelensky and Putin.

b) Supporting Zelensky at the expense of solving our own problems keeps our own solutions at arm's length forever

c) We should not care more about his border than our own

d) We should be spending that money here first

e) I don't want to get drawn into that war more than we already have

f) I think if Russia wins and wants to come after NATO, I think NATO (yes, with us in it) can take care of itself.

g) I don't want to see nuclear weapons go off...anywhere

So that brings me to Joe Biden and his sudden swing about with long-range U.S.-supplied missiles and their newly lifted restrictions to hit targets in Russia proper. Which is now okay to do. Since Zelensky has already taken a bite of that apple, Putin has, again, brought up what was once thought to be the unthinkable. Would he actually go through with it? I don't know. Nobody does. But in the days of MAD (which I grew up in the middle of), it was different. The consideration was always, "If they launch ICBMs against us, we will counter-launch ICBMs against them." And in a weird way, that balance of terror kept things aligned.

But this is not the same paradigm. Now, if Putin wants to pop a battlefield nuke on the Ukranian Army in the field (not a city), just who is going to do what exactly? Think about possibilities. Is France going to retaliate on Ukraine's behalf with a similar nuclear weapon? Britain? The U.S.? Is a nuclear-tipped Tomahawk going to come over the horizon and take out the 20th Guards Motor Rifle Division in the Donbas? Is Biden going to launch an ICBM on some Russian target on Russian soil for the sake of Ukraine?

Probably none of the above. The rest of the world will be so shocked that there might not be anything but words and condemnations for days. But then what? Who wants to go to bat for Ukraine in kind? Putin's best friends are people around the globe who think as he does. He doesn't give a crap about the U.N. or Blinken or the EU as long as they buy his oil and natgas. And if they don't, he'll just sell it to the Chinese and the Norks. So he doesn't care about worldwide condemnations.

Really, if Putin decided to do a little more than saber rattle and use a tactical battlefield nuclear weapon, what would the West do? Because once that can of trouble is opened, I don't know how effective anybody will be in getting it closed back up again. 

So does this mean that we should become isolationist and completely retreat from the war? I don't know, although it could boil down to that someday. I want to put it out there, just so that you know that I know, I'm not any kind of expert on this stuff. I never served, only have a BA after my name (History/Political Science). But I am an American and I am a taxpayer and I do get to have a say.

And I would like to see if Donald Trump has any success in brokering a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine. There was a possibility of this two years ago, but because of meddling by the West, a peace deal fell apart.

So basically I am pitting the rewards and risks of actively supporting this war against the betterment of our country. And I get the whole FDR thing about your neighbor's house fire and your hose, the arsenal of democracy, etc. But if we stay in this conflict on principle, then we are duty-bound to do that everywhere on the planet. And currently there are anywhere between 13 and 27 active wars going on in the world right now. And I don't think anybody reading this thinks we should be involved in all of them. So, if you think we need to be knee-deep in this Ukranian-Russian war, then please explain how that adds to American security and interests so much so that it justifies the risks and cost of doing it.

I might be wrong. My position could be flawed. But I am willing to listen and discuss. If somebody out there has a better take on this, I could change my mind.