Chris Hayes "sue for peace" comment:

[ColinC]

His whole comment makes him look like much less of an asshole IMHO:

Link to tweet

?s=19

Chris Hayes
·
Sep 27, 2022
@chrislhayes
·
Follow
Replying to @RossBarkan
The more concrete problem is what course of action a US citizen could agitate for to lower the risk. I think probably the best answer is cut off weapons to Ukraine and lean on them to sue for peace now. But if that's the way forward, people should make the case
Chris Hayes
@chrislhayes
·
Follow
I think there are also some pretty thorny long term arms control issues around that course, independent of what it would mean for Ukrainians. You don't *really* want to incentive threatening nukes as a means of winning conflicts or annexing territory more broadly.
3:38 PM · Sep 27, 2022

[PSPS]

1. Let me guess. This guy is just another well-paid uninformed talking head.

[ColinC]

2. Most are.

But if we're gonna crucify them, we might as well understand what they are saying first.

[elleng]

3. Sounds like a good idea,

'understand what they are saying.'

[maxsolomon]

11. Do you not know who Chris Hayes is?

He's an MSNBC anchor with his own show, "All In with Chris Hayes".

[JohnSJ]

17. Didn't he and Tina Turner have a singing duo?

[Doc Sportello]

22. Are you confusing Isaac Hayes with Ike Turner?

[USALiberal]

18. What is your background?

[PSPS]

38. What is HIS "background?" According to other replies, it seems to be only that he's "on the tee-vee"

I don't seek informed opinions from cartoon characters.

[USALiberal]

39. Or random web posters!

[PSPS]

40. Exactly! Except "random web posters" don't get makeup and big $$ for spouting their random opinions!

[Just A Box Of Rain]

4. No, still seems like a total a-hole to me.

[Ritabert]

13. Agreed

[JohnSJ]

19. I think he doesn't understand the total picture. Ukraine is defending itself from an unprovoked

invasion of Russia.

His position sounds like the position of the DSA and Jill Steins, which is that the U.S. and NATO are to blame for Russia's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine.

I am pretty sure trump gave him carte blanche when he was president, and have no doubt that if trump was still in the WH, Ukraine would no longer exist as an independent country.

Putin was a mediocre soldier in East Germany, who was upset when the Berlin Wall came done, and the Gorbachev aggreements which allowed the Eastern block countries their independents

[Me.]

20. Don't Forget That He's The Guy Who Twice Accused PJB Of Assaulting A Woman

The the head of MSNBC got fired for that little stunt, don't know why Hayes didn't also get the ax.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

24. Right. I have not forgotten. Nor should anyone.

Thank you for the reminder.

Chris Hayes should be shown the door.

[JohnSJ]

26. Thank-you. I forgot about that. I am not a fan, and I also think he is boring

[W_HAMILTON]

30. And the one that gave air time to Susan Sarandon...

... when she said that that she couldn't bring herself to support Hillary and that Trump would be preferable to because he would "bring the revolution immediately."

[dalton99a]

36. +1. No one should forget that episode

[KPN]

5. One big, Huh?

[Tomconroy]

6. He seems to be disregarding certain other consequences of

Ukraine suing for peace right now.

Reading it again I'm not sure what he's saying. Just sort of babbling to himself I guess.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

7. The term "sue for peace" is positively Orwellian in this instance.

[Mike Nelson]

8. Hmm...

... I still don't agree with his suggestion.

[maxsolomon]

9. He's discussing how the US could lower the Nuclear Threat level

coming from Putin's Russia. Right?

I see this as saying "well, we're going to have to live with Putin's threats, because the alternative is letting Ukraine lose and letting Nuclear saber-rattling win." He's not proposing this course of action.

Chris Hayes is NOT an asshole, or pro-Russia. He's a sober, big picture analyst and maybe the smartest guy on MSNBC (Rachel Maddow is the smartest gal).

[grantcart]

14. By violating the Budapest Memorandum we will forever kill non proliferation

He isn't an asshole but a gadfly completely ignorant of US assurances to countries who give up nuclear weapons.

Ukraine was the third largest nuclear power in the world when they agreed to give it all up for a US promise to assist Ukraine if they were invaded with the the Budapest Memorandum.

Turning our back on Ukraine means the end of non proliferation and a much much greater probability of nuclear war.

Chris Hayes grasp of world history is at the high school level.

[maxsolomon]

37. I think he's saying it's a bad course of action. I appear to be in the minority on DU.

You read it as advocating turning our back on Ukraine, and not devil's-advocacy?

[fishwax]

23. yeah, I agree with your reading -- he isn't advocating this course of action

Rather, it's the answer to the question "what course of action could a US citizen agitate for to lower the currently elevated risk of nuclear war?" But, as his second tweet says, that doesn't make it a good course of action to pursue.

[grantcart]

10. Oh for fucks sake

On December 4 1994 the third largest nuclear weapons country, Ukraine, agreed to give up their nuclear weapons in the Budapest Memorandum.

We, and Russia, signed the Budapest agreement where we promised to assist Ukraine if they were invaded.

How about we keep our word in standing up for reversing nuclear proliferation because if we follow this asshole's idea no country will ever give up it's nuclear weapons based on our word.

His grasp of world history is just embarrassing.

[PortTack]

34. Thank you..just f..king infuriating!

[betsuni]

42. +1

[Celerity]

44. see post 35

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100217210451#post35

[Xoan]

12. What part of, I think probably the best answer is ...

lean on them to sue for peace now.

Do you not understand?

[Caliman73]

21. The part that comes directly after that, then the other tweet.

"But if that is the the way forward, people need to make that case" Which means that Hayes might personally think the way forward is for the US to intervene by cutting off weapons, but that case has to be thought out and made by people who see it as the way to go.

THEN after that, Hayes puts out the problem with suing for peace in the face of nuclear threats. The fact that it creates an incentive for Putin and people in his position, like China with Taiwan, to make nuclear threats to gain concessions in their own territorial conflicts.

He does not seem to be saying "We definitely need to do this now" or "This is the only way that will solve the problem and it will be perfect". He seems to be saying "this is a possible solution, and the one I favor, but it needs to be thought out and people need to defend that position".

[PortTack]

33. Putin will not stop. If we, they sue for peace cruelly take away Ukraine's ability to defend itself

Who’s next? They are already talking about Poland, Moldova and the Baltic states.

You’re talking about allowing poopin’s nuclear saber rattling to threaten the ENTIRE free world? Including the US. This is what you want?

Hayes needs to leave such matters to NATO.

Raping toddlers to death, castrating men and burying ppl alive, this is what they do. Sue for peace and in a few years he’ll be back.

[fishwax]

35. I don't even think he's saying "this is a possible solution, and the one I favor"

Chris Hayes entered the chat in response to somebody essentially criticizing the left as being out of ideas because somebody posted "What do you want me to do" in response to a tweet that said "Everyone is surprisingly chill about the clearly elevated risk of nuclear war."

I take Hayes's point to be that there really isn't anything a US citizen *can* do about the elevated risk of nuclear war, other than to put pressure on our government to put pressure on the Ukraine to give up and let Putin win ... BUT, just because it is the only concrete course of action to take to lower the immediately elevated risk of nuclear war doesn't mean that it's the right course of action to take, because (as his second tweet points out) that just lays the groundwork for much bigger problems down the road.

In other words: saying "what do you want me to do" about the elevated risk of nuclear war doesn't mean that the left is out of ideas, but rather is acknowledging the reality that continuing to live with Putin's sabre-rattling may, in fact, be the best course forward.

Ross Barkan (the person to whom Chris is responding) has advocated that the US should do whatever it can to broker peace, lest Putin use nuclear weapons. He's been arguing that for months. Chris Hayes is actually putting up resistance to that idea here.

[Celerity]

43. exactly!

[BeyondGeography]

15. Masha Gessen put a scare into him about nukes the other night

He rattles too easily.

[nycbos]

16. Anthony Blinken said it best.

"If Russia stops fighting the war ends. If Ukraine stops fighting Ukraine ends."

Chris's thinking that has allowed Putin to get away with more outlandish behavior for the 20+ years he's been in power.

[karynnj]

27. This!!! Tv talking heads, including Chris Hayes, should not try to be diplomats

They do not have the background, the Intel, or the combined gravitas/expertise of Biden's national security team. Obviously, any one who has seen the death and destruction wants it to end and it will, like every previous conflict, will end in diplomacy. However, Hayes' comment suggests what would seem less US support for Ukraine.

[W_HAMILTON]

25. It still seems like a naive at best...

... downright stupid at worst, take.

[JHB]

28. A round of applause for Neville Chamberlain, everybody

[nycbos]

41. Unfortunately 90% of people out there won't get this reference

[dalton99a]

31. The same pretentious asshole who tried to catapult the propaganda against Biden

[Me.]

32. And Yet He Pushed This Fake Charge Twice

[budkin]

46. Nah, he sucks

And has for quite some time.

[Celerity]

47. Ross Barkan (NOT Hayes) is the one who has said over and to sue for peace. So many here are

incorrectly reading the entire twitter thread.



The War in Ukraine Can Be Over If the U.S. Wants It

The U.S. needs to broker a peace with Russia before the consequences become even more dire

By Ross Barkan

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/06/the-war-in-ukraine-can-be-over-if-the-u-s-wants-it.html

As the journalist Anatol Lieven has argued, it is time for America and Europe to celebrate Ukraine’s resistance and broker a peace agreement that both limits Russia’s ambitions and, crucially, permits Putin to save face. Few Western pundits, for now at least, can concede it is necessary to allow Russia to extract any degree of victory in the wake of Putin’s savagery. But foreign policy conducted among nuclear powers cannot be Manichaean. Ceding the Donbas to Russia is, in reality, a minor concession to Putin — it is partially Russia-controlled already — that would also potentially allow him to exit the war, since all authoritarian rulers are deeply sensitive to the perception at home that their military conquests are unsuccessful. Ukraine, as has been discussed before, can pledge never to join NATO. In turn, Ukraine will maintain its sovereignty, can stop sacrificing its soldiers and civilians, and will be able to further integrate, culturally and economically, into Europe. Hawks will misconstrue this as appeasement and tirelessly invoke Neville Chamberlain, as if all modern foreign policy were an exact repetition of a war fought 80 years ago. Nazi Germany conquered France in a matter of weeks; Putin’s Russia cannot even get close to Odesa.

American hawks, if they choose, can declare a partial victory. They can credit their support for Ukraine’s military as the reason why such a peace was secured, even if an agreement could have been reached sooner without as much bloodshed. The endgame of the war must be a negotiated settlement, and, yes, it will be up to the U.S. to broker one. The sooner the Biden administration and its European allies move to aggressively bring Moscow and Kyiv to the table, in spite of those like the U.K.’s Johnson who would rather scuttle such talks, the sooner the slaughter can end. Diplomacy is not appeasement. It is the only way out.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

52. I'm not opposed to negotiations.

Chris implied if the west withdraws its support Ukraine will be forced to negotiate. It is more likely they will be forced to capitulate

[DemocratSinceBirth]

49. Horrible take

There are nine nuclear states that we know of and some that could become nuclear states in months. Do we want all of them to believe they have carte blanche in invading their neighbors?

[Celerity]

50. Hayes is not the one arguing for 'suing for peace', Barkan is (and has)

see

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100217210451#post35

and

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100217210451#post47

for clarity

[mcar]

51. I don't agree

The comment is terrible, ridiculous, uninformed, and feeds into the Russia Today types who are still call themselves progressives.