Select Page

US Must Send Fighter Jets to Ukraine Now

US Must Send Fighter Jets to Ukraine Now

The situation in Ukraine is dire. Russia has invaded the country with tens of thousands of troops, tanks, artillery, and drones. The Ukrainian army is fighting bravely, but it is outmatched and outgunned. It needs urgent help from its allies, especially the US.

One of the most pressing needs is air defense. Russia has been using its air superiority to launch devastating strikes on Ukrainian positions and infrastructure. Ukraine has a limited number of aging fighter jets, mostly Soviet-era MiGs, that are no match for Russia’s modern Su-30s and Su-35s. Ukraine also lacks advanced air-to-air missiles, radars, and electronic warfare systems.

The US has the capability and the responsibility to change this. It should send F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine as soon as possible, along with the necessary weapons, training, and support. F-16s are versatile, reliable and combat-proven. They can perform air-to-air and air-to-ground missions, as well as provide close air support to ground forces. They can also deter and counter Russia’s aggression in the region.

Sending F-16s to Ukraine is not only a moral duty, but also a strategic interest. It would signal to Russia that the US is serious about defending its ally and upholding the international order. It would also reassure other NATO members and partners in Eastern Europe that the US is committed to their security. It would also boost Ukraine’s confidence and morale and inspire other countries to join the effort.

Some may argue that sending F-16s to Ukraine is too risky or provocative. They may fear that it would escalate the conflict or trigger a nuclear war. But these arguments are misguided and dangerous. They ignore the reality that Russia is already escalating the conflict and violating the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. They also underestimate the deterrence value of F-16s, which could prevent further Russian aggression and create space for diplomacy.

The US has already sent other forms of military aid to Ukraine, such as Javelin anti-tank missiles, drones, radars, and Humvees. But these are not enough to stop Russia’s onslaught. Ukraine needs fighter jets now, before it is too late. The US should not repeat the mistake it made in 2014, when it hesitated to send lethal weapons to Ukraine after Russia annexed Crimea.

The US has a historic opportunity to stand with Ukraine and defend freedom and democracy. It should not let it slip away. It should send F-16s to Ukraine now, or else the blood will be on our hands.

AUTHOR(?) NOTE: The article above was totally written (no editing) by Bing AI in response to this request.  “Write a newspaper article in support of sending jets to Ukraine.”  Is this scary … or what?

So, there ‘tis.

About The Author

Larry Horist

So,there‘tis… The opinions, perspectives and analyses of Larry Horist Larry Horist is a businessman, conservative writer and political strategist with an extensive background in economics and public policy. Clients of his consulting firm have included such conservative icons as Steve Forbes and Milton Friedman. He has served as a consultant to the Nixon White House and travelled the country as a spokesman for President Reagan’s economic reforms. He has testified as an expert witness before numerous legislative bodies, including the U. S. Congress. Horist has lectured and taught courses at numerous colleges and universities, including Harvard, Northwestern, DePaul universities, Hope College and his alma mater, Knox College. He has been a guest on hundreds of public affairs talk shows, and hosted his own program, “Chicago In Sight,” on WIND radio. Horist was a one-time candidate for mayor of Chicago and served as Executive Director of the City Club of Chicago, where he led a successful two-year campaign to save the historic Chicago Theatre from the wrecking ball. An award-winning debater, his insightful and sometimes controversial commentaries appear frequently on the editorial pages of newspapers across the nation. He is praised by readers for his style, substance and sense of humor. According to one reader, Horist is the “new Charles Krauthammer.” He is actively semi-retired in Boca Raton, Florida where he devotes his time to writing. So, there ‘tis is Horist’s signature sign off.


  1. Ac

    AI is not a substitute for human discernment and voice. In this instance AI related information retrieved from general knowledge on the Ukrainian situation, Biden’s posture on F-16’s sent, and reasons pro and con given. In addition, AI included past commentary of yours on send F-16’s to Ukraine as a pro argument.
    Myself being a longer time reader of PBP and your commentary style, this piece does not contain any distinctive human passion in its voice. Certainly, the words on the page were soon determined to not be yours, but a flat recitation lacking your usual perspective bias driven tone.
    Student’s assigned written essays are using AI generated work instead of doing research work expected. Most are found out for the plagiarists they are. Had you not noted AI output not yours was used for this commentary, how many readers would see through and know it’s a ruse.
    Otherwise, AI use solely on its own is justifiable plagiarism. You would earn an “F” grade on your essay and ,probably, a private meeting with the assigning entity.

    • James F M Baur Jr

      This whole article, in my opinion, is no more than a bunch of deceptive crap. I could never care less, but I do wonder how you were given access to this site.

      • larry Horist

        James F Baur Jr … I can understand that you may not agree with the opinion expressed, but the larger point is that it was generated by a computer upon request. I have Bing AI. I put my name on a waiting list and got an email that I could sign up. I am sure there are millions of people on Bing AI by now. This is a game changer that will question everything we know about being human. Much like cloning and computer character generation has. That voice you hear … that image on the screen … and now the intellectual content may be the work of machines.

  2. larry Horist

    Ac … You need to know more about AI — and plagiarism — before you opine on the subjects. You entire response misses the major points. I have written a second commentary on the subject that will enlighten you a bit further. AI is not just another search engine. It can assemble the data and provide “intellectual” content. That is something Google cannot do as of yet. You can ask Ai to write songs, poetry — and even in a voice — like “give me a poem on the space station as Shakespeare would have written it.” Not sure why you said the article incorporated my words in any way. I was not among any of the sources of information. And there is no plagiarism in any of that article as far as I can tell. It drew on source data, but did not produce unscarred passages, as far as I could see. The difference between Google search and AI is that one produces raw date — much of which is, itself, opinion — and one that assembles the data into a narrative. Previously, that was left to the human brain. And that is the HUGE difference. The follow up commentary should be online soon.

  3. Tom

    Great shock tactic Larry!!! Major kudos on this one. I think the point of your article is AI and how it can seem real but isn’t. Excellent job!

    I knew it was AI because it did not contain your other famous phrase, “but I digress….” which I noticed just lately Bill Sheridan has started to use! I think he is trying to be you!! Makes me wonder, is Bill Sheridan AI? And who’s fingers are really behind him?

    But now comes the scary thought. Is Larry Horist a real person or just an AI response generated by Frank Stetson – you know, the guy you always accuse of creating an “alternate Horist”?

    It is very possible that Frank has Multiple Personality Disorder, and Lib Frank is his base personality, and he has created Alt Larry as his antithesis so that he can argue with himself!

    Please provide evidence that you are a real human Larry. You have shattered me. My brains are splattered!!!

    • larry Horist

      Tom … I am human. I am human. I am hum .^^#^&(*&^#%*)(____++*&%#

  4. Darren

    The real wonder is if AI understands the complete Russian position.

    This is the equivalent of Russia backing Mexico if we were in a war with Mexico so
    Russian Missals can be installed there and directed at the U S.

    Was AI aware of this or just given the facts on the conflict?

  5. Doris Lauter

    Putin wanted to have talks of peace, and Ukraine, Zalensky said no. Zalenski thinks we can use up all our defense properties for his war, and we should stop the help now and make him have talks with Russia now. The war could go on indefinitely if we keep supplying him with our supply of defense items.

  6. jboo7

    As usual, the MAIN POINT OF THIS PROXY is its suitability for a Civil War that could be extended into a major International One.
    It had been tested already in Mr. Obama’s First year as President, in 2008: Another “Proxy”, Georgia, bombarded Russians, until Russia came in!
    The time between starting the first (Civil) War on Maidan and the Big Increase in Bombarding Donets was only prolonged through Pres. Trump!
    The Civil War was left stagnant, until Pres. Obama’s “THIRD TERM” (Biden) arrived – the, the killing was increased, and Russia came.
    AND WESTERN RUSSIA HAD BEEN OCCUPIED BY POLAND FOR OVER 400 YEARS, changing language, culture and religion,
    while the Eastern region of DonBass is still MOSTLY RUSSIAN INHABITED.

    • larry Horist

      Jboo7 … It seems you want to reconstruct the world as it existed way in the past. Perhaps Eastern Europe was part of the USSR — the Russian empire. But that was then and this is now. Putin invaded a world recognized independent nation with established borders. If we apply your back-to-the-future logic, Russia was once the geography the Gingas Kahn empire, so maybe China should invade Russia to get it back. Of course, since the Persian Empire once controlled much of Europe, Iran should be invading Turkey and other nations to reclaim what was once there land. Conversely, Egypt was once the land of the Roman Empire. Should Italy invade Egypt? Under the current world order and laws, Russia is an aggressor and Putin is a war criminal.

  7. CornPop

    “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. Then any ensuing lie is deemed the truth. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” Joseph Goebbels – Nazi Propaganda Minister

  8. AC

    AI, or Larry, or all other contributors believing their understanding brings some clarity in extremely murky international waters. Some would reason that the complicated past history when several people groups lived in the region claiming ownership by heritage serves as prologue for future claims to rightful possession.
    Meanwhile, Mother Russia through Prophet High Priest Putin aims for a unification of all states historically under Old Russian province.
    Russia military strength, in Putin’s estimation, is his key that will (must) open the door of his dictatorial autocrat’s dream.
    As in Putin’s deluded perception that a majority of Ukrainians wanted Russian advantages so they would no resist once Kiev fell into Russian control.
    This war does not have all pieces of a political puzzle that make for civil war. Ukraine’s fight is not from within, but against outside foreign aggression coming from its neighbor, Putin’s Russia.
    On one factor central in this war’s duration, ugly character in practice, inhumane treatment of innocent Ukrainian people, needless destruction of infrastructure, and relentless deployment of missilery and offensive attacks by air bombings, comes by direction of a demented mind bent on taking by every means at his disposal. Putin, by most world leaders’ accounts is that demented a personality.
    His war, then is bond to grind on and on. What will defeat him and his ambitions will be a military defeat without question that he and his forces are unable to continue. What that looks like? How Ukraine will come out in the end? How much will the US give to defeat Putin, knowing he himself will never willingly surrender to the US and Ukraine’s allies?
    Probably, the greatest questions for us as Americans governed by representative democracy depend this country’s leadership in showing strength of spine and strong stomach. Ukraine’s winning back it sovereignty as a nation is possible only after Putin ultimately is defeated, militarily and politically unseated. Worst case scenario in the event that this is the only solution.
    US military forces have superior capabilities to what Putin has at his command. Yet, wisdom in restraint has long been both a moral and ethical dilemma. Is sending F-16 fighter planes the first step on a slippery slop, or can these additional military assets turn the tide in Ukraine’s favor.
    Even so, planed, trained pilots, bombs, rockets and tech backup will not make up for Ukrainian military feet on the ground not enough in numbers for success in the field.
    The Russians employ mercenary Wagner Group in their toughest battles. Mercenaries make the deference for Russia staying in this war. Who will rise up in the fight on Ukrainians side. Where will well trained and armed troupes come from and receive financing.
    AI pulls from information available on line. What it will not do is decide for humans what, in human moral and ethical understanding, is best for themselves and other humans. Therefore, decisions that are a must do president setting for mankind’s future.

  9. John

    The insane have taken over the asylum, we’re going full speed ahead into a thermonuclear 3WW, not one atom of diplomacy being attempted.

    • larry Horist

      John … So you think it is better to surrender in the face of a threat. Let Putin take Ukraine and whatever else he desires because the west will always surrender to the threat. Some wanted to do that with Hitler — but that did not happen because we eventually realized that surrendering to threats is a sure way to lose everything. Our problem has been too much diplomacy and not enough facing down Putin with our military. Does he want to take on the strongest military in the world — not to mention the NATO forces? Diplomacy also means drawing lines in the sand — and meaning them.

  10. Julius Goldfinger

    Ukraine—an ally? I think I missed something. Since when? When did we join forces with Ukraine and they became an ally? Since when?

    • larry Horist

      Julius Goldfinger … Right after the break up of the Soviet Union … when Ukraine became an independent nation — along with a bunch of others we once referred to as the “captive nations.” Several of them are now in NATO. Ukraine has wanted to join NATO, but they were dealing with corruption and leaders who were still friendly to Russia. That ended when Zelensky got elected in a democratic election. We were in cooperative arrangement with the Ukraine military — that is why Biden had to pull out American military when Putin announced his invasion. Ukraine has been supportive of America on a lot of international issues. If Putin gets booted, Ukraine will likely become a NATO ally. If Putin wins, America loses a lot more security and power on the world stage. Putin gains strategic positioning and Ukraine’s enormous resources. If Ukraine wins, Putin has his worse nightmare … NATO on virtually all of Russia’s western border — now that Finland and Sweden are joining NATO.. Putin is an existential threat to the United States. If he win, world leadership shifts to the Russian/Chinese combine. If Putin wins, we will probably lose Taiwan as an ally … and Kim Jong un will be tempted to try to take South Korea. Yes, Ukraine is a critical ally if we want to maintain American leadership in the world.

  11. Oscar Williams

    Well, folks: This is what President Eisenhower warned us about just before he retired after his second term. And HE was a first-hand witness of the evils of WARMONGERS. He called this group of humans(?) the “Military-UIndustrial Complex.” (Call it the M-I-C for short.) They — IT — exists to create an international market for sh!t that will kill masses of people, destroy homes and cities, and out-destroy the weapons the “other side” is using. And then provide this suicide-inducing sh!t to both sides. (By the way, the MIC sold the weapons to the “other side” too.) So, rather than design and fashion machines and systems that BUILD society and HELP people, they are in the “business” of doing exactly the opposite. And get filthy rich doing it. I like the old ‘1970’s question, “What if they gave a war and nobody came?” God help us to get to that point in humanity.

    • frank stetson

      Oscar, perhaps if Ike was around today, he would change MIC to Pharma-Medical Complex that locks us indoors, forces drugs into our bodies, after using our money to develop the disease and the drugs to cure it.

      Not that I believe this but …..

      And yes, PMC sells to all sides.

      Or worse yet, the MMC, or Medical Mattress Complex that convinces us we all have sleep apnea and need a $2,000 mattress to stay healthy.

      • larry Horist

        Frank Stetson … and do not forget about the political/labor union complex … or the education/industrial Complex. Or the College of Complexes.

      • larry Horist

        Frank Stetson … Gads! You now even have your own mental Eisenhower, suggesting he would say things he never said. You must have an entire world of imaginary doppelgangers running around in your head. Can you check out what Ghingas Kahn might think of NATO?

        • frank stetson

          This was by far your best article ever.

          Keep up the good work, you’re getting better.

          And bye the bye, please tell us what Hitler would think of DeSantis.

          • larry Horist

            Frank Stetson … And by far you best response. Silly … insulting … but mercifully short.

    • larry Horist

      Oscar Williams …. You may like the old expression popularized by the Flower Children of the 1960s, but it is silly sentimentality as long as their are powers that want to conquer the world and subjugate freedom. You seem to have the Neville Chamberlain approach … surrender at all costs. If world leaders and military leaders thought like you, we would all be speaking German today — excepts for Jews and blacks, who would be killed off. There are things that good and just people must fight for — or against. How much military would you eliminate.? By the way, how is the weather in Utopia these days?

  12. Ac

    Let’s hear a shout out in support of First Amendments rights. Everyone is free to have a personal opinion speak their mind.
    There is a caveat. Making public what’s on your mind probably will unleash an avalanche of opinions. Most speakers will differ in opinion. More than a few may cast aspersions on the original speaker’s character and intelligence. While others join in a concert of partisan bullying all who happen to opine differently.
    Points being, The First Amendment’s portion on Free Speech, Free expression, Free Press, and other related speech freedoms guarantees says nothing in warning of probable negative consequences as a result. As, positive consequences can result as well, deciding what to speak and where it’s spoken and to whom it is said speaks to one’s personal choice.
    Further, this Amendment does not imply an expectation of speakers that their speech must be mature, reasoned, intelligent, considerate, truthful,, non-inflammatory, unprovocative, interesting, and more that contribute positively to the total sum of public discourse
    What we have here is not a failure of communication or a failure to communicate. If that is Larry’s objective and goal in part, he’s accomplished it.
    On the other hand, if in promoting his opinions with written commentary he thinks will result in acceptance, belief, faith, and ultimate conversion to his way, then, Larry, in conversion of the many you have failed to communicate.
    Free Speech is one right. Freedom to disagree with what is spoken is, also, a right. Then, what remains is the freedom to hold the speaker accountable. Is it permissible that those in disagreement with what is shared have it in their rights to dismiss another’s right of humane considerate treatment by unjustly admonishing their intelligence, knowledge, discernment on a matter, and call as suspect one’, right to a certain personal world view.
    Hey, what’s fair for the goose …
    Those that can’t take in kind ought not dispense tough judgement on dissenters.
    Jus’ sayin’ ‘s all, right.

    • larry Horist

      Ac … As I have noted many times, I am a free speech advocate in the tradition of the Founders. Remember? “I may disagree with what you say, but defend to the death your right to say it” Or “sicks and stone may break my bones, but names ill never hurt me” — unless you are snowflake. Folks us this platform to say all kinds of things about me that are totally untrue and insulting. I know they are wrong factually or just meant to hurt or sully my reputation — but I would not think of censoring them. You are right. The First Amendment does not require that a persons opinions much be correct or even that it must be nice. You have a constitutional right to say the most disgusting things as long as you do not cause real harm … such as inciting a riot, slandering a person with lies. Those limitations have been imbedded forever. I express my opinions based on hard facts, experience and common sense. Anyone can respond on the same basis. But I do not support cancelling of suggesting folks not be allowed for their views. We saw how social media attempted to cancel news reports about the Hunter Biden’s lap top … or about the source of Covid … or about opinion (like mine) that we essentially had a riot, not an insurrection. We ae currently being misinformed about Trump’s lawyer going to jail for the Stormy Daniels deal. He was pressured to admit to that as part of a plea agreement for tax fraud that had nothing to do with Trump. Should MSNBC be shut down for spinning that story? Free speech is necessary to a free society even if it is messy and offense — and makes the weak , insecure and folks with low self-esteem feel bad.