After spending the last eight years pushing the notion of foreign policy as an afterthought with America needing to “lead from behind,” Democrats have suddenly recast themselves as foreign policy hawks. Particularly towards Russia.
Following last week’s report in The Washington Post regarding Attorney General Jeff Sessions’s meetings with Russia’s US ambassador last year, Democrats collectively lost their minds, calling for Sessions’s resignation with alacrity.
That story has two key points. First, Sessions’s meetings were nothing out of the ordinary (he met with over twenty-five foreign ambassadors while in the Senate), with one of the two meetings even organized by the Obama administration. Second, Sessions attended the meeting as a member of the Armed Services Committee with no ties to the Trump campaign (hence his testimony!).
Nevertheless, sharpening her tomahawk, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) tweeted, “And we need Attorney General Jeff Sessions – who should have never been confirmed in the first place – to resign. We need it now.”
The Washington Post’s’ Chris Cillizza wrote, “Jeff Sessions is in deep trouble. Bigly.”
The New York Times’s headline read: “Jeff Sessions Needs to Go.” Another of its op-edheadlines read: “What to Do With Jeff Sessions.”
Presumably, for the next four (eight, if they keep this up) years, liberals have concluded their best argument against securing the border and deporting criminal illegal aliens: THE RUSSIANS ARE COMING!
So, in light of the Democrat Party’s newfound infatuation with the former USSR, let’s briefly review the party’s history with Russia.
— WOODROW WILSON:
Near the end of the First World War, as the Bolsheviks’ rise to political prominence grew commensurate with increasing destabilization of the Romanov Dynasty, US troops were sent to Archangel, Murmansk, and Vladivostok. The campaign was called, ‘The Northern Russia Expedition.”
In 1917, as the Bolshevik revolution broke out, the Russian aristocracy was exiled and replaced with communists: Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin (or, as they’re referred to at the University of California, Berkeley; The Three Wise Men)
Once the Armistice of Compiègne was signed in 1918, Woodrow Wilson withdrew US troops from the region instead of engaging the communist uprising. As a result, the Bolsheviks prevailed, and communism spread, leading to the mass slaughter of millions.
— HARRY TRUMAN:
President Harry Truman, at the Yalta conference, agreed with Joseph Stalin that Poland – along with the rest of Eastern Europe – would have free, democratically elected governments following its liberation from Nazi control. Predictably jettisoning that promise, Stalin went on to institute a communist, USSR-controlled puppet government in Poland. The Soviets went on to do the same in Albania, Bulgaria, Romania, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, and Hungary.
Truman’s efforts to halt (or even slow down) the Soviet Union’s rapid expansion into Eastern Europe and far-reaching influence into Turkey and Iran went nowhere.
And then we have Korea. For all their banal tirades of George W. Bush’s Iraq War (which he won, handily!) liberals are quick to forget about Truman’s disastrous Korean intervention. Despite no formal obligation to intervene, Truman sent an armada of US forces to Korea, against the Soviet-backed communists in the peninsula’s north. As the war escalated and it became clear that Truman didn’t have a clue what he was doing, much less a vision for victory, his approval rating dropped so low, it just barely hovered above smallpox.
Read More >>