Christian Post Goes Full Neocon, Attacks Conservative For Opposing Ukraine

The Christian Post may be to the right of The Gospel Coalition, and is definitely to the right of Christianity Today, but they are a neoconservative outlet that shills for the Passion Conference and publishes Anti Defamation League talking points on a regular basis. Now on their chopping block are conservatives who oppose funding World War 3 in Ukraine.

Richard Land is one of the primary figures at the Christian Post, and he has always been a bad guy. He served as head of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention. He would be succeeded by Russell Moore. While Moore was a more obvious wolf, Land has demonstrated his compromise on key issues in the past. Last month he advocated legal protections for homosexuality. This month, he is advocating for endless funding of Ukraine, proving that supporting Ukraine is gay.

Land begins by painting Ukraine as a sovereign nation, a fact undermined by their declared intentions to join the European Union, appealing to a national identity that has never really been a distinct nation, from Russia, Poland-Lithuania, or various Turkish or Mongol khanates.

After being subjugated brutally by the U.S.S.R. for 69 years (including the infamous “created” famine of 1932-1933 during which millions of Ukrainian peasants were deliberately starved to death), on Dec. 1, 1991, the Soviet Union ceased to exist and 90% of Ukrainian voters cast their votes for independence from Russia.

Thus, the Ukrainian zeal for independence was finally realized. This was a dream come true for Ukrainians and a nightmare for the Vladimir Putins of the world. In 2014 Putin seized the Crimea by force and had been sponsoring a low-scale insurgency in eastern Ukraine which has large numbers of ethnic Russians in its population.

It is interesting to note that polling shows that 90% of voters voted for independence in Ukraine nationwide and almost 77% of voters supported independence in the Russian majority Donetsk. Even in the heavily Russian Crimea, 59% voted for independence. This would lead one to believe even Ukraine’s ethnic Russians preferred Ukrainian freedom to reunification with Mother Russia under Vladimir Putin.

Land is highly deceptive here going back and fourth from 1991 to the current conflict. While the Soviet Union collapsed in late 1991, Ukraine is a fundamentally different nation. The will of the people in 1991 could have easily changed in 30 years. Land, nevertheless insists that the people’s views in eastern Ukraine, and their attitudes of Moscow and Kiev have not changed in 30 years. This is a bold face canard.

After establishing the premise that Ukraine is reliant on American aide, Richard Land simps for Zelensky.

I have been both shocked and ashamed at the reaction of some “conservatives” who have opposed America’s support for the Ukrainians, criticizing President Zelensky for cracking down on freedom of speech and placing restrictions on the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine (the leadership of that church opposes Ukrainian resistance to the Russian invasion).

I would remind these conservative critics that President Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus during the Civil War and at the beginning of World War II we threw approximately 150,000 Japanese-Americans into internment camps in the wake of Pearl Harbor without any due process.

Even vibrant democracies get pretty testy when their survival is at stake. In the wake of the 9/11 attacks, our government surveilled mosques.

I am frankly bewildered by the conservatives’ criticism of President Zelensky for appearing before a joint session of Congress in military style fatigue dress. Do they not remember Churchill in a military style jumpsuit during his visit to America in the midst of the hour of Britain’s greatest peril in 1941?

Zelensky is a tyrant, and times of war did not justify Lincoln’s use of habeas corpus (which was prior to the American Civil War), Japanese internment camps, or the example he left out: America imprisoning opponents to World War 1.

He then cites 9/11 and proceeds to uphold the ERLC tradition of defending Muslim’s religious liberty, rather than point to the abuses of the PATRIOT Act.

Does the U.S. want to further destabilize the world order by once again going back on our word or failing to keep our word to other countries? If the answer is yes, think about what that would do to all of our commitments to allies around the world. If we allow Russia to succeed in this aggression, the world becomes a much more dangerous place as naked aggression is rewarded.

Furthermore, let’s clearly understand what would be happening in Ukraine if, absent American and Western military aid, the Russians had prevailed militarily.

The United States destabilized Iraq, Afghanistan, Egypt, Libya, and Syria, but the fall of Ukraine will be the downfall of world peace. Land contends that Ukraine is part of western civilization in this article, but the divide between east and west, particularly in Europe, is derived from the split between Eastern and Latin churches. Ukraine is not and has seldom ever been a part of the western world, yet our security is threatened. This is the same lie as “we fight them over there, so we don’t have to fight them here” that we heard for Iraq and Afghanistan.

Richard Land then proceeds to go full war propaganda mode for Ukraine in listing the more outlandish atrocities alleged to have been committed, even claiming that the Ukrainian language would be banned despite the Ukraine’s current language laws. After rehashing boomer neocon talking points from the Cold War, Land concludes with a virtue signal.

And in Ukraine, America and the West have found a real country in every sense to help defend, not merely aspiring countries like Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Ukrainians are not asking for anyone to fight for them. They are fighting (quite bravely and well) for their own freedom. They are not asking us to fight. All they are asking for from us are the weapons with which to defend themselves.

The shameful argument that some conservatives are making is that it is costing us too much financially to aid the Ukrainians. It would be far more costly not to do something. Plus if you gave any fair-minded person 24 hours with the federal budget, they could find enough waste to arm Ukraine for years to come.

The world of freedom-loving nations should draw inspiration and resolve from our incredibly brave compatriots, the Ukrainians. I proudly wear a Ukrainian flag lapel pin every day as an act of solidarity. Such bravery should never be abandoned, but wholeheartedly supported.

Ukraine wants our weapons, but they also want our money and bodies. Part of the aid packages they received are to stabilize their government and economy. Ukraine has been itching to get World War 3 even hotter, even killing Poles and insisting that Russia did it even after getting caught. The Ukrainians don’t fight for freedom. They fight for the interests of the World Economic Forum.

America has no business funding World War 3, a world war we can easily avoid and end. As for Ukraine, they will either run out of weapons, or they will run out of bodies. As a Christian conservative, I have no interest in fueling this outcome. Instead, we need to put America first.