Trade Land for Peace in Ukraine to End War

Former U.S. Sect. of State Henry Kissinger may in a sense be said to have laid the foundation for the present world order, along with President Reagan. Democrats are trying to destroy world peace with their uncomprehending policies that clash with good historical sense. The war in Ukraine would be a protracted war, like that of Vietnam and Syria, that were Democrat led engagements. One should not be less conservative in spending the lives of foreigners in war than one is of one’s own citizens I would think, unless the foreigners are enemies directly attacking one’s nation. Democrats should care about extending a war with finance that would enable thousands more Ukrainians and Russians to perish, even if it means that stopping the war would end much good domestic political rhetoric and public posturing.

Sect. Kissinger may have been the designer of the U.S. change to open good relations with China. He also was heavily involved in Middle Eastern policy to end conflict although permanent improvement in diplomatic relations required much sacrifice all around from Anwar Sadat to Donald Trump giving up golfing perhaps to get some Arab nations to normalize diplomatic relations with Israel. Henry Kissinger is concerned about the present China policy and bellicose statements concerning it perhaps (by President Biden), yet he has also expressed what I regard as a practical policy to end the Ukraine war; land for peace.

https://www.newsweek.com/henry-kissinger-ukraine-should-give-territory-russia-reach-peace-1709488

President Ford managing a land for peace deal wherein the Sinai was returned to Egypt. President Clinton helped Palestine get a homeland with land conceded by Israel at the Oslo Accord. President Biden isn’t likely to win a Nobel for negotiating an end to the Ukrainian-Russia war yet he is well-positioned to do so. Basically Russia would keep its present Eastern Ukraine holdings through war and would recognize West Ukraine as an independent state.

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/president-ford-statement-on-the-interim-egyptian-israeli-troop-disengagement-agreement-september-1975

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo_Accords

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_occupation_of_the_Sinai_Peninsula

Americans are fairly daft at history concerning Eastern Europe and especially Russia though, so motivating the administration to grow a brain would be challenging. Thousands of lives could be saved if adult supervision could bring the administration to support Dr. Kissinger’s approach to ending a conflict that George Soros said could be the start of World War Three. World War III would be bad for business and the environment.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/23/kissinger-says-taiwan-cannot-be-at-the-core-of-us-china-negotiations.html

Sect Kissinger wrote a master’s thesis on Metternich and his role acting for the Hapsburg Empire. He understands the balance between nations and even empires. Democrats today are more of the Hillbilly, possession is 9/10ths of the law/Hatsfields-McCoys school of political thought. Republicans periodically need to clean up their wars, or bring them to an end as did President Nixon and Sect. Kissinger in Vietnam that was a Democrat led engagement. One should not be less conservative in spending the lives of foreigners in war than one is of one’s own citizens I would think, unless the foreigners are enemies directly attacking one’s nation. Democrats should care about extending a war with finance that would enable thousands more Ukrainians and Russians to perish, even if it means that stopping the war would end much good domestic political rhetoric and public posturing.