White House says there will be 'consequences' but no 'red lines' for Russia
Christian Datoc | March 14, 2022 04:59 PMWhite House press secretary Jen Psaki reiterated Monday that Russia would face severe "consequences" if the country carries out a chemical attack in Ukraine but stopped short of drawing any red lines for intervention from the United States.
"I think that you heard the president say on Friday that there would be severe consequences, and the world would respond if they were to use chemical weapons," she stated during one such exchange. "And what we have been doing over the course of the last several weeks, if not months, is providing as much information to the global community, to the media, and to others about what to expect." . .
. . .Throughout the briefing, and in days past, the White House has ruled out some retaliatory actions the U.S. could take against Russia, including sending troops to Ukraine or installing a "no-fly" zone over the country.
Pressed by a reporter, Psaki claimed that it's "inaccurate" to say the U.S. doesn't have "any more severe consequences" to deter Russian President Vladimir Putin. . .
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-house/white-house-says-there-will-be-consequences-but-no-red-lines-for-russia
If there is no red line, then there really isn't anything that Putin can't do here. Even looking back at his WWIII comment, there was nothing there that said the US would commit troops. He spoke of a unified NATO, but did not mention the US as a part of it.
I am convinced that if Russia moves against Poland or Estonia, that this administration would continue to vacillate. Let's say Russian troops cross over into Estonia or Poland. Does the US then move into Ukraine against Russian forces and reinforce Odesa, Kyiv, and Lviv? According to Joe Biden, no.
The rest of NATO is on their own, and they know it.
