He would have put troops in Ukraine and told Putin if you attack them we would attack you.
Putin isn't going to rosk NATO involvement
Had Trump been reelected in 2020, do you think that Putin would have still invaded Ukraine?
- Thread starter WolfBear
- Start date
Putin isn't going to rosk NATO involvement
Doomsought
Well-known member
He could have politely asked to put a US warship in a Ukranian port for "Resupply" during the buildup for the invasion. The Russians would either back down, or have to risk attacking a US warship, a very traditional way to invite to US to war.
Send tanks,planes and more artillery from the start.Soviets would not even take Mariupol.
bintananth
behind a desk
Trump isn't subtle. He wants you to know what he's up to so that he can tell you, "Look at what I just did."
Had Trump been reelected in 2020, do you think that Putin would have still invaded Ukraine? What are your own thoughts on this?
FWIW, Trump Russia adviser Fiona Hill doubts this since Putin viewed Biden as a more respectable negotiating partner than Trump, thus ironically (in her opinion) spurring Putin to invade Ukraine since he believed that he and Biden could subsequently reach a deal over spheres of influence and whatnot more easily than he could under Trump, whom he viewed as being easily distracted:
Putin ‘had to keep explaining things to Trump’, ex-White House aide says
Fiona Hill, a former national security council official, said Russian leader grew frustrated with Trump: ‘Putin doesn’t like to do that’www.theguardian.com
Anyway, what do you think?
Absolutely not. Trump was too much of a wild card. He played the Mad man strategy to a hilt and did it better than Kissenger could have hoped for.
Floridaman
Well-known member
True only ones i know of who have ever done it better are the Kim's, but then they might legitimately be nuts.
History Learner
Well-known member
Had Trump been reelected in 2020, do you think that Putin would have still invaded Ukraine? What are your own thoughts on this?
FWIW, Trump Russia adviser Fiona Hill doubts this since Putin viewed Biden as a more respectable negotiating partner than Trump, thus ironically (in her opinion) spurring Putin to invade Ukraine since he believed that he and Biden could subsequently reach a deal over spheres of influence and whatnot more easily than he could under Trump, whom he viewed as being easily distracted:
Putin ‘had to keep explaining things to Trump’, ex-White House aide says
Fiona Hill, a former national security council official, said Russian leader grew frustrated with Trump: ‘Putin doesn’t like to do that’
Anyway, what do you think?
It would've been exactly the same outcome; there's been no difference between how Biden handled this and Trump would have.
The same outcome includes the invasion itself? Or would Putin have backed off in this TL?
History Learner
Well-known member
The invasion and U.S. response; there was never a chance we were going to send formations into Ukraine politically and Trump's public statements align with that.
I was just wondering if maybe Putin would have held off on the invasion since Trump might have tried to take the US out of NATO in his second term. Invading might have only strengthened the pro-NATO forces in the US and West (just like it did in real life) and thus swept the carpet from under Trump's feet, so to speak.
I'm sorry, but that's flat out wrong. A big difference between Trump and Biden is that Putin respected Trump. He didn't like him but he respected him. Enough that he wouldn't have considered an invasion because Trump projected strength. Biden projected weakness and Putin felt confident enough that he wouldn't do anything to truly oppose him. He's largely been right on that call.
Sending HIMARS to Ukraine is doing nothing to oppose Putin?
Let's just say it's the least Biden can do, and still maintain the image of supporting the effort against Putin.
The Russians had to know we'd send weapons. Though I'll admit to being surprised to be sending that one.
History Learner
Well-known member
There's no indication at all Putin respected Trump on a personal level and the initially good relationship was largely based on the fact Trump was willing to turn on NATO. When, as President, Trump began to do things like arm Ukraine and sign agreements with Ukraine that indicated a future NATO membership, the relationship definitively soured. Any perception of strength, if there actually was one, would've disappeared after the events of 2020-2021 as the U.S. backed down first with Iran in 2020 and then the Taliban taking over Afghanistan in 2021 would've shown American weakness on the global stage.
History Learner
Well-known member
We've supplied over $50 Billion in military aid, larger than all the rest of NATO combined. You really think the Democrats spent four years screaming about Russiagate for no reason other than to fight the Orange Man?
To the Left...$50B IS chump change.
Yes, I believe it was all about trying to oust Trump. He's their #1 threat. Russia was a convenience that also happened to draw fire away from their own links to Russia.
History Learner
Well-known member
It’s also about 50 times what Trump gave to Ukraine in the course of his administration so….
In reality, the “Left” and “Right” in the U.S. had nothing to do with Russia and are pretty united on the subject.
So, why didn't Putin invade Ukraine in 2019 or 2020 rather than in 2022? He might have gotten a softer US response in 2019 or 2020 due to Trump's isolationism, no?
Poland isn't liberal so why are they supporting Ukraine?