It’s an easy argument. Those that suggest that we can’t afford to continue to support Ukraine are making the wrong argument. Supporting Ukraine is expensive. Getting involved ourselves in war is more expensive. Losing a war is much more expensive. So the only question is does our support of Ukraine make it more likely to get into conflict with Russia or less. I argue that it makes it less likely–punching a bully in the nose with a significant enough shot makes it much more likely they’ll stay in their lane. Ukraine is willing to continue to fight for their freedom if we’ll stand by them. They are willing to spill their blood against a hostile power that is our enemy–not because we want them to be our enemy, but because they cannot abide a U.S.-led international order. Further, other bullies are watching. If Russia can wait out the west and secure the land mass it wants, then China can make a different calculus re Taiwan. And of course Russia will pocket any gains we give them, and use any period of pause as a pathway to rearm and plan for their next aggression. History shows this is just what they do. For those that disagree with me, such as several of the conservative leftists, they will say there is an ocean in between us and that Europe should defend themselves. While I don’t disagree at all with the latter thought, the reality is that we have lived through two world wars precisely because the ocean in between us is not sufficiently large to prevent us getting involved. The two pictures above of U.S. dead at Normandy are just a small part of the total. History suggests that if we don’t prevent war in the first place, it will come to us eventually. Yes, President Trump can secure peace in our time. But don’t be surprised that our time might be much shorter than we think, if we allow Russia to achieve an unjust result. My hope is that his current rhetoric is just that, and he will remember the “peace through strength” pathway he has both espoused and acted upon in the past.