• @luckyhunter
    link
    -31 year ago

    Actually, if we want to assume hurting Russia is what’s best for America, then we need to trickle just enough material aid to keep Ukraine’s military from complete collapse and let the whole conflict grind on for a few decades. Just like what we did for Afghanistan in the 1980’s, the last thing we’d want is for Ukraine to win quickly.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      31 year ago

      I’ve heard this talking point before, but it’s completely illogical. If you want to hurt Russia you give the other side everything they want and in great numbers and let them do whatever they want with it.

      • @luckyhunter
        link
        -11 year ago

        It’s got a long track record of working great. It doesn’t matter what they say they want or need, what matters is what is best for the US? Even though I disagree with all of the aid we already have sent, have you noticed there is no serious calls for peace from any US leader? This plan is already in action.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          No and no. Best is what is best for Ukraine. There are many aspects to it not only one, of course each countries politicians have to look at it from different perspectives and wheigh the options with those in mind, but that doesn’t change what matters.

          I have seen non stop calls for peace for all nations and leaders in the world. In not sure what media you follow, but calls for peace have been going on since before the war, since before the occupation of crimea. I’ve seen leaders go to see Putin and plead for peace. Putin has 0 interest in that unless he gets everything he wants, so he can start to prepare for next invasion.

          • @luckyhunter
            link
            -11 year ago

            Oh it absolutely changes. US politicians need to determine what’s best for the US. And recently that has been to stop funding aid to Ukraine for atleast the next month, and to now enter into a new house speaker voting battle which could take weeks resolve. And those “calls for peace” have been symbolic “please don’t invade, go home”. There’s been no serious peace negotiations, I don’t even think there’s been much push from anyone for negotiations. If it’s in the US’s best interest to continue to harm Russia, then the trickle of aid will resume, but like I said originally I personally think that mission has been accomplished, and we can be done with it and I’m in the majority.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              11 year ago

              Again, the funding for Ukraine continues. In reality yhere is no disturbance there.

              Again, calls for peace are in almost every public speech of almost every world leader, so I have no idea what the hell you are taking about. But I’ve seen this taking point coming from the kremlin when they are trying to self victimise.

              I have no idea what mission you think America has accomplished. The war will last for some time and America has signed contracts to deliver weapons for at least the next two years. Multi year contacts have been signed with many other countries. The weapon deliveries have barely just begun. You being in majority is a big streatch after one cnn poll. What currently matters is that congress is voting 3:1 in favour of continuous help. It’s unlikely that will change in the near future and even if it did, many contracts are already signed.

              And again, the idea that they would limit aid to prolong the conflict is completely illogical.

              • @luckyhunter
                link
                11 year ago

                Ok, who organized and hosted the most recent peace talks between Ukraine and Russia? what terms were discussed?

                Oh it’s completely logical. We’ve done it to Russia basically in every single one of their conflicts since the start of the cold war.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  11 year ago

                  There can’t be any meaningful peacetalks when one side actively occupies another country and claims it wants even more territory. Of course the only “peace talks” they would listen to are from the only country that hasnt completely cut them off which is China. And china has its own interests in this. Peace is easy. The only thing that needs to happen is that Russia removes their army from Ukraine borders. The borders they have recognized and signed dozens of international resolutions to that effect for the last 30 years.

                  Your statement is completely illogical and because of that it has never been done in such a way. It might work against a smaller country where there wouldn’t be any other involved party. Especially not the size of EU. Not even then. You are repeating Russian propagandist talking points. Why? Are you aligned with them? If not, doesn’t it concern you that you are using exactly the same language?

                  • @luckyhunter
                    link
                    11 year ago

                    I didn’t realize Russia was advocating to save me money but thats cool. No it doesn’t concern me at all because claiming “Russian propoganda” doesn’t change anything I’ve said.