Once again, the problem is our fossil fuel addiction.

Russian President Vladimir Putin knows he has very short window to wrest territory back under Russian influence ("Putin orders troops to eastern Ukraine," front page, Feb. 22). Thirty-nine percent of Russia's budget revenue and 60% of its exports are fossil fuels. Most of his customers are planning to replace these with locally produced clean energy sources. Within five to 10 years, oil and gas will have fallen out of favor and will not provide the necessary funding for Russian political leverage or military games.

The question is, how do we contain his nation-building in the meantime? Putin knows very well that Russia is among the world's largest producers of fossil fuels. His 1997 Ph.D. dissertation, "Strategic Planning Of The Reproduction Of The Resource Base," was over 200 pages on how to exploit the country's natural resources for political gain.

Are you and I, and the rest of the world, willing to stomach the inevitable price gyrations of oil and gas that accompany a refusal to buy from him? Are we willing to invest more quickly in alternative clean energy sources?

Putin is clearly calculating the answer to these questions is no.

Mark Andersen, Wayzata

•••

As the world community watches and waits to see what Putin will do in regard to Ukraine, we have had a blast from the past.

In past days, some of former President Barack Obama's allies in both official and media capacities have come to the conclusion that maybe, perhaps, Sen. Mitt Romney had a point in 2012.

Romney had said our most worrisome foe was Russia. He was almost laughed off the stage at the third presidential debate and dismissed by the press and both Obama and then-Vice President Joe Biden. Obama stated, "The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back." Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton echoed the same.

Well, here we are 10 years on: Not China (as former President Donald Trump would have us believe) but Russia is yet again the one to keep our eye on.

Romney said it then and it came to pass, whether it ended up being meddling in our elections or this threat of a new world war.

There are many policies of Romney's with which I've always agreed, but on this, no one can argue.

Did the electorate get it wrong 10 years ago? That's certainly debatable. Romney has been shown to be correct on taxes, Russia and, yes, even the elevation of Trump as president, and in his votes of impeachment of the same.

Romney is a man of true integrity, full of love and pride for our country.

I am proud to call myself a Romney Republican. He has been wrong and proven so, as all are; however, one must wonder, "What if?"

Joshua Zollar, Chisholm, Minn.

•••

As tensions continue to build with Russia over its attempt to dominate Ukraine, it's important to remember that the U.S. and Russia have 90% of the nuclear weapons in this world. Just to keep a nuclear cataclysm from happening, now is the perfect time for the U.S. to declare that we will never use nuclear weapons first in any conflict: no first strike from the U.S. Let's not allow a regional conflict to balloon into the sudden end of our lives because of an unintended nuclear war.

We might also want to think about all the things we could do with the money we are spending on producing yet more nuclear weapons, for example: tax cuts for all, child tax credits, etc. What do you want? Don't be quiet about it. More nukes? Or more stuff you could actually use?

Ron Bardell, Minneapolis

•••

In "America's 'most fateful error' led to the Ukraine crisis" (Opinion Exchange, Feb. 22) the writer bemoans a decision a generation ago to expand NATO eastward as the cause for the current international crisis. Unfortunately, to today's generation, NATO, the treaty that secured the postwar peace, has lost relevance and faded into the days of yore.

Look no further than last week's Jeopardy! National College Championship featuring three clever college contestants including a University of Minnesota student. None of the three could correctly, or even approximately, answer the easiest question under the category "Abbreviations." The answer: NATO.

Perhaps it's time to update the Associated Press style guide and start spelling out "North Atlantic Treaty Organization" so rising generations can understand and appreciate its important and continuing role in the international order.

Sean Murphy, Minneapolis

Stephen Young's "Tyrants unite, marginalize America in new 'new world order'" (Opinion Exchange, Feb. 16) unfortunately accurately describes our planet's post-millennium retreat from democracy, or at least part of it. He focuses on Russia's Vladimir Putin and China's Xi Jinping, though could have included Hungary's Viktor Orban, Turkey's Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Philippines' Rodrigo Duterte or Brazil's Jair Bolsonaro. He should have included the friend of all these autocrats, our own former President Donald Trump. But bizarrely, Young ended his article by attributing America's deteriorated democracy to "wokeness, intersectionality and critical race theory" — rather than the obvious historical fascist playbook of appealing to and dividing people by nationality, religion and class. Trump Republicans are following the same sad script of Benito Mussolini, Adolf Hitler and Putin — creating a cult of personality through nationalism, scapegoating and press-bashing. Unfortunately, Young may be correct that we are entering a post-enlightenment era, but attempting to link this to progressive values, rather than Republican autocratic traits, makes no sense.

Ryan Pulkrabek, Minneapolis

Star Tribune sportswriter La Velle E. Neal III writes on Monday, "Four more years? Hey, vote me in." The next day he writes, "China should never have been allowed to hold these Olympics." He, along with so many other print and broadcast journalists, chose to dance to the music of China's totalitarian government while covering the Olympics. He strongly criticizes "the International Olympic Committee for failing to take a stand, holding its hands out and accepting billions from this ruthless country." Sorry, Neal, and all other journalists who covered the 2022 Olympics. Your words condemning China are about three weeks too late.

Yes, "there were warnings [about] speaking out about China." Speaking out while telling the truth is a journalist's job. Looks like the athletes were not the only ones who were trying to protect their careers.

George Larson, Brooklyn Park

•••

The Olympics just wrapped up. I again found myself watching, as much as I could, the athletes and competitions. I started watching Olympics as a kid, finding it fascinating. It sparked my imagination. Later, in university track and field competition, I had a Bob Beamon moment, long-jumping 2 feet farther than my best. It should have taken me to nationals, but I had scratched by an inch. My Olympic dreams faded away. Still, every four years, I would watch the Olympics and feel renewed hope that we may someday create a more peaceful world.

So, this time, we feel Mikaela Shiffrin's troubles and worries. We applaud U.S. athletes, even if they don't make the medal stands. We tire of the focus on the medals, yet we stress out watching Nathan Chen. We develop a connection with Mike Tirico and the NBC team. We take for granted the effort, time, technology, cameras and sound systems that result in NBC's incredible coverage. We worry about dangerous wind gusts at the halfpipe, causing competitors to crash. We appreciate amazing performances by athletes from all countries. We worry about Russia's treatment of athletes and whether it wants war. We worry about China's undemocratic society, treatment of minorities and crackdowns in Hong Kong. We worry about our own country's shortfalls.

But on the last day of competition, all of this fades as Minnesota's Jessie Diggins inspires and teaches us — even as we worry that she pushed too hard in the 30-kilometer race.

Kerry Keen, Minneapolis

We want to hear from you. Send us your thoughts here.