I don't agree.
"Do you believe that allowing the Russians to rebuild the former Soviet Union Warsaw Pact back into a unified force is in our interests?"
If I saw real evidence of this, rather than sentiment, I would agree. Crimea is not Poland or Germany. At this point it looks to me like NATO is expanding into traditional Russian spheres and writing a check we cannot cash.
However, there are ways to prevent Russia from achieving such a goal without ever speaking a single word.
Energy independence, and even SURPLUS in the US is the only strategic alternative we have.
Anything else is but blather.
(It is in the national interests of the US to stop, when possible crimes against humanity.)
“I don’t agree.”
I’m sure you don’t, if you look at security interests from a narrow perspective. I would suggest looking at it from a broader approach, because, it is in our interest not to have holocausts and ethnic cleansing happening around the world. Helping to stop it, also builds good will and credibility for American interests around the world, which furthers our security interests in multiple areas.
“Crimea is not Poland or Germany.”
Geo-strategiclly, it is in our interest to deny the Russians full naval basing access in the Crimea, and to deny them logistics routes trough Eastern Ukraine.
“At this point it looks to me like NATO is expanding into traditional Russian spheres and writing a check we cannot cash.”
I don’t think you are understanding the concept of “national interest”. Of course we want to enter into former Soviet/Russian spheres LMAO. A contained and restricted Russia is a good thing.
“Energy independence, and even SURPLUS in the US is the only strategic alternative we have.”
We have agreement. Not to it’s sole utility, but to it’s strategic importance.