See also: Maybe Russia's interests regarding Ukraine are simpler than you think

Putin continues playing a cat and mouse game with Ukraine.  Putin may be the rare predator who tires of the game and walks away, but that's not how the smart money bets. The question is what does America do if and when Putin launches the first European military invasion since WWII?

My view is that we should support Ukraine with everything short of directly engaging the Russians with American soldiers. We should continue to send supplies, including lethal weapons to help Ukraine inflict as many Russian casualties as possible.  We, with our allies, should impose the harshest economic penalties on Russia.  The Russian public is not on board with this invasion.  We should encourage their opposition.

It is comforting that most Americans agree.  It is surprising but comforting that the Biden administration at least mouths this view.  It is a bit uncomfortable that a major voice of American conservatism, and a man whose views I generally respect, thinks this position is crazy.  Of course, I'm referring to Tucker Carlson.  Tucker asks why we should choose between two countries in that part of the world.   Let's look at the most obvious reasons, then look at some of Tucker's almost limitless objections and finally use his trump card against him. 

When the Soviet Union collapsed Ukraine became an independent country with a large number of nuclear weapons.  It agreed to relinquish those weapons in return for a guarantee of its borders from The United States, the United Kingdom, and Russia.  

No one expects Russia to keep its word -- and that seems to advance Russia's menacing aggressive policies.  But that's not the case with America.  If countries do not trust America there is no added incentive for them to resist the superior military of China and Russia. The other option is to acquire nuclear weapons and never relinquish them. It's insane to encourage a world where everyone has weapons of mass destruction. 

Tucker says if we just grant a Russian wish by forbidding Ukraine to ever join NATO all would be well.  There are two problems.  Russia will probably attack anyway; with all its frozen land it has trouble growing enough food to feed itself. It appears to want to seize fertile Ukrainian land rather than continue buying food.  Making Tucker's concession would be a fruitless act of appeasement.  Even Germany, our most dovish European ally, agrees. 

Here's some perspective.  Substitute Ukraine for Czechoslovakia, Russia for the Third Reich, and Tucker Carlson for Neville Chamberlain and one has, "peace in our time" deja vu.   Am I exaggerating?  Russia is demanding that NATO return to its pre-1997 borders.  That means abandoning all the countries from the Czech republic east.  Putin wants to reestablish the Soviet Evil Empire.  Those countries include the Baltic countries, Poland, and 11 others.  Among the 11 others is a country that both Tucker and I admire: Hungary.  Hungary shares a border with Ukraine.  Is Tucker prepared to allow Russia to reabsorb Hungary?   Given the amount of airtime Tucker has given Hungary, I really want to know if he is.  I'm not.

Tucker has a series of frivolous arguments, which are beneath his normal standards.  Tucker wants to know why Liberals, who have no concern for American borders, care about the sanctity of Ukrainian borders.  I'm not a Liberal and I care about both.  All he's doing here is demonstrating that Liberals are at best inconsistent or more likely hypocrites.  I hope he has more similar shocking insights for us. 

We should not care about Ukraine because it's corrupt and not really a democracy.  It wasn't a satellite country.  It was an integral part of the Soviet Union.  Of course, it was corrupt.  That is no longer the case, despite the Biden father-son effort to keep it that way.

It isn't a democracy because Ukraine's President is a fourth-rate comedian.  President Zelensky is a former host of a morning TV show similar to GMA or Fox and Friends.  Does Tucker really want to eliminate TV hosts from public office?  Fourth-rate is in the eye of the beholder.  I'm open to evaluations of Tucker's radio gig with Bubba the Love Sponge.  Do I hear first-rate?  Second?

Ukraine is not a democracy because it has jailed the leader of the opposition.  The man Viktor Medvedchuk is under house arrest awaiting trial for illegally transferring oil leases to Russia.  I don't know if he's guilty, but I'm quite sure he'll get a fair trial if Ukraine remains a free country.  If he's convicted, why shouldn't he be imprisoned?  If -- say again if -- Durham ties Hillary to actual spying on Trump while he was President, I'm fine with jailing her.  If Tucker disagrees, I'm sure his viewers would want to know. 

So much for the silly arguments.  As Tucker correctly explains, much of American prosperity depends on the dollar being the world's reserve currency.  China is trying to replace the dollar with the yuan as the world's reserve currency. Tucker thinks that opposing Russia will force it into an alliance with China and that combined with the world's displeasure with American economic sanctions on Russia will lead to the dollar's downfall.  First Russia is already China's ally.   Russia has at best a middling economy.  If one adds in all the current allied countries like Iran, North Korea, etc. the economic total is unimpressive. 

There are one of two ways the dollar can lose its dominance.  Our reckless fiscal and monetary policies can drive investors out of the dollar through market forces.  A partial solution to that problem will be available in November.  The second way is for the combined forces of the Russian-Chinese alliance to absorb enough countries to overshadow the economies allied with America.  That could happen only if America allows the world to lose trust in America.  A major reason to support Ukraine is to demonstrate that America keeps its word.

Graphic credit: Victoria_Borodinova Pixabay license