Republicans Blister Lindsey Graham's Bipartisan Resolution in Support of Ukraine Admission to NATO

Mike Miller reporting for RedState 

In this episode of Lindsey Graham Being Lindsey Graham…

Throughout Lindsey Graham‘s nearly 30 years in Congress — first in the House, now as South Carolina’s senior senator — he’s been an enigma, to put it tactfully. Graham has at times taken conservative views, while other times, he’s voted and behaved like a full-throated Democrat.

On Friday, Graham was the latter. He took to Twitter to tout his plans to push a bipartisan resolution urging the admission of Ukraine into NATO, as its brutal war with Russia continues to rage.

I will be working with Republicans and Democrats in the Senate to pass a resolution urging the admission of Ukraine into NATO.

The best way to prevent future wars and promote peace is to create security guarantees that make aggressor nations think twice before starting wars.

Ukrainian NATO membership is vital to the future security of Europe and the world. I believe there is an overwhelming majority of Senators supporting this proposition.

Yeah, that didn’t go over well at all with several key congressional Republicans.

Incidentally, I reported earlier on Saturday about former Fox News host Tucker Carlson‘s extensive interview on Russell Brand’s “Stay Free” podcast on Friday, during which Carlson talked about his views on the seemingly never-ending war. Fascinating stuff.

As for Graham’s assertion that an “overwhelming majority of senators” support  Ukraine’s admission to NATO, while that might be true on the Democrat side of the aisle, not so much on the Republican side. One such R — Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul — absolutely torched Graham’s proposal.

Absolutely not. This is exactly wrong – as usual – and could very well lead us to war with Russia, something no one should want.

Note the “as usual” blast, as well, which speaks volumes about Paul’s opinion of Lindsey Graham and his predictable shenanigans.

While I won’t offer an opinion on the wisdom—or lack thereof—of admitting Ukraine to NATO while the violent war continues, I will suggest it would be a risk, at best, particularly in light of recent troubling development.

As my colleague Streiff reported on Friday, the next U.S. aid package to Ukraine will include “cluster munitions” for 155mm and 105mm artillery. The question is, given the clear escalation, how will the unpredictable Vladimir Putin respond?

And as Streiff reported on July 4, Russia and Ukraine accused each other of planning an attack on Europe’s largest nuclear reactor. To suggest that the Ukraine-Russia war is a veritable powder keg would not be unreasonable. Given Russia’s historical — and sometimes hysterical — paranoid view of “enemies” on its border, would a NATO admission for Ukraine be the match to light the powder keg?

Colorado Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert was also aghast over Graham’s proposed resolution, tweeting a “troops on the ground” warning in response:

I’m sure Lindsey Graham knows this, but this would mean American troops on the ground in Ukraine.

The American people will not stand by and allow our troops to go die in someone else’s war.

The salient question remains: Is Ukraine “someone else’s war,” or will the war’s outcome have an impact on U.S. security?

Kentucky Republican Rep. Thomas Massie also blasted Graham, referring to NATO as a “Cold War relic.”

Expansion of NATO, a Cold War relic, led to the rise of Putin, also a Cold War relic, culminating in the invasion of Ukraine. Expanding NATO further is not in the interests of US citizens.

Seems to me that some might support Ukraine’s eventual admission to NATO but oppose it while the war continues.

Incidentally, Massie has endorsed the 2024 presidential campaign of Ron DeSantis, who in May released a statement on the Ukraine-Russa War that drew fire from some Republicans and praise from others.

We cannot prioritize intervention in an escalating foreign war over the defense of our own homeland.

Excellent point— or a flawed observation?

Additionally, DeSantis’s reference to the war as a “territorial dispute,” which he later tried to walk back, didn’t sit well with a number of fellow Republicans who saw the Florida governor’s characterization of the brutal war as dismissive. Then-Fox host Tucker Carlson, a staunch opponent of the conflict, was in agreement with the DeSantis statement.

The Bottom Line

The Republican Party’s internecine war over which candidate would have the best chance to kick Joe Biden and his left-wing handlers the hell out of the White House in 2024 is troubling enough, given the damage to this country that a second Democrat presidential term would only make worse. An intraparty battle over the war in Ukraine only adds gas to the GOP fire.