Niall Ferguson @nfergus
Replying to @JDVance
Well, thank God also for free and open debate.
Having visited Ukraine every year but one since 2011, I think I have an informed and realistic view.
I repeatedly criticized the Biden administration for its failure to deter Putin in 2021 and failure to end the war while Ukraine…
3:20 PM · Feb 21, 2025

JD Vance @JDVance
·
In this thread I'll respond to some of what I've seen out there. Let's start with Niall:

1) On the general background, yes, you have been more right than wrong on a lot of the details of the conflict. Which is why I'm surprised to hear you call the administration's posture "appeasement." We are negotiating to end the conflict. It is "appeasement" only if you think the Ukrainians have a credible pathway to victory. They don't, so it's not.

2) As far as I can tell, accusations of "appeasement" hinge on a few arguments (not all of them from Niall, to be clear). The first is a criticism that we're even talking to the Russians. Well, the President believes to conduct diplomacy, you actually have to speak to people. This used to be called statesmanship. Second, the idea--based often on fake media reports--that we've "given the Russians everything they want." Third, that if we just passed another aid package, Ukraine would roll all the way to Moscow, raise Navalny from the dead, and install a democratic and free leader to Russia (I exaggerate, but only a little). All of these arguments are provably, demonstrably false.

Many people who have gotten everything wrong about Russia say they know what Russia wants. Many people who know the media reports fake garbage take anonymously sourced reports on a complex negotiation as gospel truth.

3) On the specifics of the negotiation, I"m not confirming details publicly for obvious reasons, but much of what I've seen leaked ranges from entirely bogus to missing critical info. The president has set goals for the negotiation, and I am biased, but I think he's awfully good at this. But we're not going to telegraph our negotiating posture to make people feel better. The president is trying to achieve a lasting piece, not massage the egos or anxieties of people waving Ukraine flags.
The idea that the President of the United States has to start the negotiation by saying "maybe we'll let Ukraine into NATO" defies all common sense. Again, it's not appeasement to acknowledge the realities on the ground--realities President Trump has pointed to for years in some cases.
4) Many of the subjective criticisms amount to pearl clutching that don't ultimately matter. I'm happy to defend POTUS's criticisms of the Ukrainian leadership (not that it matters, because he's the president, but I agree with him). You're welcome to disagree. But these critiques of POTUS don't bear on the war or on his negotiation to end it. //

OrneryCoot
3 hours ago
The fact that the VP of the United States is willing (and extremely capable) of having detailed policy discussions with a British historian concerning an extremely volatile, sensitive, and relevant situation on X/Twitter is absolutely fantastic. They are bypassing entirely the legacy media and putting it all out there for everyone to see. We see everything unvarnished and without the filter and bias of the legacy media "journalists", and can comment on it in real time. THIS is what healthy, productive, free societies have yearned for since probably Athenian democratic debates over 2,000 years ago. Regardless of what side you are on, we should be in the balconies or right at the front of the stage cheering this on for all we're worth. The only losers here are those who want to restrict or alter the flow of information for their own selfish ends, like corrupt bureaucrats, politicians, freaking coup leaders, and the legacy media. It is a great time to be alive! //

Fight On
2 hours ago edited
To all the GOP neocons:
1) define “victory”
2) describe the path to “victory”
3) what’s your plan? be specific, accountable, realistic. time bound
4) math. Math wins in a war of attrition: Ukraine troops < Russian troops. It’s a numbers game, reality.
5) the GDP of Europe is huge compared to Russia. Europe can afford to fund and defend Europe, Ukraine from Russia. Without US.
6) Russia’s military has proven to be third rate -.not the threat you make it out to be
7) Europe is mooching off the American taxpayer for their defense. THIS MUST STOP!
8) NATO has consistently broken their promises to limit the advance of NATO eastward.
9) Biden/Harris regime threatened to add Ukraine to NATO - Russia’s red line
10) Neocon rhetoric constantly provokes Russia with regime change.
11) USA IS BROKE! EVERY DOLLAR SPENT ON UKRAINE IS BORROWED ON A CREDIT CARD!! AMERICA FIRST!!!!!