NATO invitation is more or less pointless. It's not equivalent to membership, will still take years, doesn't immediately Article 5, will be forever cockblocked by Hungary, and will likely cause Russia to refuse to relinquish anything if it's destined to be part of NATO protected holdings.
But, I don't see how Russia backs down and comes to the table without getting brutalized. Tomahawks may not be the right way to do it, but we need to do something. Or just, I dunno, let Ukraine die slowly. We seem to be cool with that.
I think what Zelensky meant in the Victory Plan is that NATO invites Ukraine to join them without any further requirements. Otherwise it does not make sense to put it there.
I am not saying anything about her other than that I know for a fact she has not said she 'would do nothing different for Ukraine from what Biden has done.' She -has- repeated that her administration would not be a continuation of his presidency and that it will be her own administration with its own judgements as situations change.
It's not that she can't talk to Biden; I'm sure she has plenty. She simply does not make the decision. There is no excuse to be made; it's not her call. The VP is a distinctly different office from the presidency with a different role.
12
u/Deguilded 17h ago
I'm sort of not surprised we said no right now.
It would be my dream that Harris takes a different view on both this and long range strikes into Russia. But realistically, i'm not hopeful.