4 ms·

> The US convinced Ukraine to scrap their nukes as they promised they would come to Ukraine's aid if needed No they didn't. There was never any promise like th

> The US convinced Ukraine to scrap their nukes as they promised they would come to Ukraine's aid if needed No they didn't. There was never any promise like that.

WinstonSmith84 2y ago
Yes they did (with Russia) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine_and_weapons_of_mass_de... > ... In 1994, Ukraine agreed to transfer these weapons to Russia ... in exchange for economic compensation and assurances from Russia, the United States and United Kingdom to respect the Ukrainian independence and sovereignty in the existing borders.... And yes there is this point but this is irrelevant. Ukraine played by the rules and got played. Nobody would have invaded Ukraine in 1994 if they had refused, especially given the state of the Russian army at this time > While all these weapons were located on Ukrainian territory, they were not under Ukraine's control.[4]
- arandomusername 2y ago
  > Seek immediate Security Council action to provide assistance to the signatory if they "should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used". Which they did. Please tell me which exact aspect of the Budapest Memorandum did US not follow through?
kdavis 2y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum
- arandomusername 2y ago
  > Seek immediate Security Council action to provide assistance to the signatory if they "should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used". Which they did. Please tell me which exact aspect of the Budapest Memorandum did US not follow through?
JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> There was never any promise like that There wasn’t a treaty obligation. But there was a promise. Similarly, there is no treaty obligation for America to respond to Russia nuking Paris with even harsh words. Just promises around the treaty obligation to take “such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force” [1]. Let there be no doubt: the United States is defaulting on its promises in Ukraine. [1] https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_17120.htm https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_17120.htm
- pqtyw 2y ago
  Technically the Budapest Memorandum was a "political agreement" between the governments of US/UK/Russia at the time. It wasn't an actual treaty like NATO that was ratified by congress. Of course you do have a point about the "such action as it deems necessary" part.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- arandomusername 2y ago
  The Budapest Memorandum did not promise any defense. > Seek immediate Security Council action to provide assistance to the signatory if they "should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used". Which they did.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    § 4 only applies "if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used" [1]. Russia is violating § 2. But Trump, Musk and Vance, by directly negotiating with Putin in respect of Ukraine's borders, are failing "to respect the Independence and Sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine" (§ 1). [1] https://policymemos.hks.harvard.edu/files/policymemos/files/2-23-22_ukraine-the_budapest_memo.pdf?m=1645824948 https://policymemos.hks.harvard.edu/files/policymemos/files/...
_DeadFred_ 2y ago
The current United States Secretary of State disagrees with you: https://bsky.app/profile/dittie.bsky.social/post/3lji5yzf5ns2w https://bsky.app/profile/dittie.bsky.social/post/3lji5yzf5ns...

> The US convinced Ukraine to scrap their nukes as they promised they would come to Ukraine's aid if needed No they didn't. There was never any promise like that.

WinstonSmith84 2y ago

Yes they did (with Russia) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine_and_weapons_of_mass_de... > ... In 1994, Ukraine agreed to transfer these weapons to Russia ... in exchange for economic compensation and assurances from Russia, the United States and United Kingdom to respect the Ukrainian independence and sovereignty in the existing borders.... And yes there is this point but this is irrelevant. Ukraine played by the rules and got played. Nobody would have invaded Ukraine in 1994 if they had refused, especially given the state of the Russian army at this time > While all these weapons were located on Ukrainian territory, they were not under Ukraine's control.[4]

arandomusername 2y ago
> Seek immediate Security Council action to provide assistance to the signatory if they "should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used". Which they did. Please tell me which exact aspect of the Budapest Memorandum did US not follow through?

kdavis 2y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum

arandomusername 2y ago
> Seek immediate Security Council action to provide assistance to the signatory if they "should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used". Which they did. Please tell me which exact aspect of the Budapest Memorandum did US not follow through?

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

> There was never any promise like that There wasn’t a treaty obligation. But there was a promise. Similarly, there is no treaty obligation for America to respond to Russia nuking Paris with even harsh words. Just promises around the treaty obligation to take “such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force” [1]. Let there be no doubt: the United States is defaulting on its promises in Ukraine. [1] https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_17120.htm https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_17120.htm

pqtyw 2y ago
Technically the Budapest Memorandum was a "political agreement" between the governments of US/UK/Russia at the time. It wasn't an actual treaty like NATO that was ratified by congress. Of course you do have a point about the "such action as it deems necessary" part.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
arandomusername 2y ago
The Budapest Memorandum did not promise any defense. > Seek immediate Security Council action to provide assistance to the signatory if they "should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used". Which they did.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  § 4 only applies "if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used" [1]. Russia is violating § 2. But Trump, Musk and Vance, by directly negotiating with Putin in respect of Ukraine's borders, are failing "to respect the Independence and Sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine" (§ 1). [1] https://policymemos.hks.harvard.edu/files/policymemos/files/2-23-22_ukraine-the_budapest_memo.pdf?m=1645824948 https://policymemos.hks.harvard.edu/files/policymemos/files/...

_DeadFred_ 2y ago

The current United States Secretary of State disagrees with you: https://bsky.app/profile/dittie.bsky.social/post/3lji5yzf5ns2w https://bsky.app/profile/dittie.bsky.social/post/3lji5yzf5ns...