• Silverseren
    link
    fedilink
    311 year ago

    Is this actual money in this case or is this more designated monetary amounts of goods, ie the worth of the guns and tanks and other things we’ve been giving them that were just collecting dust over here?

    Because that’s what most of the past monetary support was. No actual money was involved and so didn’t really cost us anything.

    • 133arc585
      link
      fedilink
      141 year ago

      the worth of the guns and tanks and other things we’ve been giving them that were just collecting dust over here?

      Use of reserves motivates replacement. Just because you’re giving them weapons that were produced in the past, and therefore whose (production) cost has already been incurred, doesn’t mean that occurs in a vacuum. With stock running low, contemporary money goes in to replenishing that stock. In effect, there’s no difference whether you send old or new equipment, because both incur costs in the present.

      No actual money was involved and so didn’t really cost us anything.

      It cost you exactly the amount it cost to produce them. Just because it was produced in the past, doesn’t mean it was free. You paid for it X years ago, and are only now seeing it used. You paid for it. Moreover, you’re now going to pay to replace it.

      • @SkyezOpen
        link
        391 year ago

        Except a bunch is old stock or overstock. The US was sitting on stockpiles of 203mm artillery rounds from the m110 that they would’ve had to pay someone to decommission, but it turns out that there’s a soviet arty piece that can use them, and guess what? Ukraine has em. Not to mention they chronically overproduced M1A1 Abrams to the point that generals were begging for it to stop, simply because it would be more expensive to shut down and restart production than simply keep making tanks nobody wanted or needed. Plus, a significant portion of the old inventory was DESIGNED to blow up russian equipment. So the US is clearing out old shit, crippling the Russian military, and aiding a new democracy. The only downside is the fresh money that is probably going to be dumped into the MIC to fill those clean shelves, but (and this is basically NCDposting but here we go) the fact that the US can almost singlehandedly provide Ukraine the resources to hold out against fucking Russia for over a year and that equioment still being only a tiny fraction of their total might? Holy shit. Grab the money shovels boys.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          31 year ago

          Plus it helps clear out shelf space for new shiny shit, why have massive stocks of old obsolute junk sitting in the Sierra army Depot when you can empty it out and fill it with shiny new junk!

          Also its interesting how the Ukrainians have used some of the equipment which gives new data for R&D.

        • Łumało [he/him]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          21 year ago

          Who are you kidding thinking they don’t want to have a constant state of excess? It will be replaced, it has to be bought.

      • @ICE_WALRUS
        link
        11 year ago

        As a small millitary subcontractor the contractor above us is already hidding to replace the artillery shells we have sent over. Projections say it will take until 2026 to replenish the stock.

        I’d like to note that yes there is a lot of useless to us equipment being sent over that we won’t miss, but what I don’t see reported is we are also legitimately depleting rockets and artillery ammo that is our bread and butter pretty rapidly.

        It’s not to the extent that we couldn’t still invade a country, but it has dipped well below projections to fight a 2 front war which is why theres actually a pretty serious eagerness to replenish certain subsets of the stock.

        I just wanted to point out that it isn’t all mothballed equipment being sent, I know that is pretty much what’s being reported, but ilI review contracts daily that say the reality is we are sending stuff we have identified as vital to our core defense strategy as well and furthermore the stocks are depleted enough to put us behind the required amount set by the upper brass of the millitary in case of a global war.

    • Echo71Niner
      link
      fedilink
      31 year ago

      your answer to your question

      the worth of the guns and tanks and other things we’ve been giving them that were just collecting dust over here

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      21 year ago

      Yea we just have billions of dollars of military equipment that popped out of thin air and of course will not be replenished in the next trillion dollar military budget.

      • Harrison [He/Him]
        link
        fedilink
        81 year ago

        You have trillions of dollars worth of military equipment from the cold war mothballed or in storage.
        Most of it will never see use because it’s outdated technology. There are thousands of planes, tanks and miscellaneous vehicles just sitting out in the desert waiting to be scrapped or reactivated.

      • Silverseren
        link
        fedilink
        71 year ago

        We have billions of dollars of military equipment that was made 10+ years ago and has been sitting around since then because we have no reason to use any of it.

        To the point where military commanders are begging Congress to not make the military budget so big because it’s being wasted on building more assets that aren’t seeing any use.

    • @Zippy
      link
      11 year ago

      Also what amounts are going where? Could be 39 billion to the border and 1 billion to Ukraine.

      They intentionally lump these sums together so that they can distribute it as they desire. There is no reason to do this other then to hide funding.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        8
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I mean you could have just read the article.

        13B for defense support and 8B in Humanitarian aid for Ukraine. 12B for federal disaster funding. ~7B for border funding, Fentanyl seizure Ops, and other stuff. So the 7B is vague, but it’s a budget. You could probably just go to the house or senate page once it’s released to get the details.

  • Bloops
    link
    fedilink
    311 year ago

    Biden still owes us $600 from his campaign promise lol

  • Queen HawlSera
    link
    fedilink
    English
    191 year ago

    How about 40 billion to support getting some bitches… on a Single Payer Healthcare program.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    181 year ago

    Can we go ahead and just declare a state of emergency on the climate crisis? Or do we need the rest of the states to burn down as well? Shit’s getting me frustrated

  • @jcit878
    link
    171 year ago

    aid is good, but we need to stop dancing around and allow provided arms to be used cross border. or maybe itll take the deaths of another 250000 russian conscripts

    • SpicyPeaSoup
      link
      fedilink
      11 year ago

      Unironically the most logical comment here. Aid to Ukraine is good, but we need to commit and go balls deep. No silly half-measure, attack russia where it hurts, especially those annoying-ass bombers and missile/drone factories.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        151 year ago

        What are you an Army general? I kinda would prefer the government not give any more reason for a nuclear strike by Russia. Which is absolutely where we’re trending if America starts dropping pretenses and begins directly arming incursions into Russian borders.

        • SpicyPeaSoup
          link
          fedilink
          -81 year ago

          Russia only understands one language: violence.

          They need to be shown where their place is, and NATO’s combined might is more than capable of doing so. Hell, Ukraine with NATO’s leftovers is keeping russia at bay.

          If russia wants to go nuclear, so be it. They’ll be absolutely eradicated, so they won’t strike first.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            171 year ago

            If russia wants to go nuclear, so be it.

            Geez, NATO libs have really gone all in on nuclear armageddon won’t be all that bad actually. I’m sure you think you won’t be sent to the front lines if the US and NATO ends up in a multi front war with Russia, China, India, Brazil, multiple African nations, Cuba, Venezuela, and an ever growing list of other countries.

            Maybe we should just chill out and accept that we live in a multipolar world and work together for common goals instead of fighting pointless wars to enrich the shareholders and prop up capitalism for a few more years before it collapses under its inherent contradictions.

            • GodlessCommie
              link
              11 year ago

              Fucking NATO libs have gone off the rails.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            131 year ago

            Okay armchair army general, I guess we’re going to nuclear war against a country on another continent that we’ve not technically declared war with because of your expert geopolitical analyst.

            • @Bluetreefrog
              link
              English
              11 year ago

              You Americans talk like school bullies lmao.

              As opposed to Russians, who act like school bullies.

                • @Bluetreefrog
                  link
                  English
                  11 year ago

                  Don’t know, and your question is whataboutism.

                  Russia invades its neighbors and acts surprised when other neighbors want to join NATO!

                  If Russia doesn’t want other countries to swing to the west, then all it has to do is stop behaving badly. Easy.

                  Just for interests sake, here’s a map of all the countries that Russia has invaded. It’s pretty telling really.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            11 year ago

            Name on state or nation in the world that isn’t rooted in violence and that doesn’t have an army

            • @sneakycow
              link
              11 year ago

              You could argue Vatican City has some rooted violence and doesn’t have an army - they borrow the Swiss guard.

        • SpicyPeaSoup
          link
          fedilink
          -71 year ago

          The US hasn’t threatened to nuke anyone, unlike russia. NATO doctrine states that we’d overwhelm russia with conventional means if they use a nuclear strike first, and russia knows that’s a fight it can’t win.

          Now go fuck yourself, you tankie cunt spunktard.

          • o_d [he/him]
            link
            fedilink
            31 year ago

            The US is the only state to have ever used a nuclear weapon against another country.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              0
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              And that country had invaded China, Korea, Thailand, French Indochina, Indonesia (Dutch East Indies), Burma, Philippines, had plans to invade Australia, and committed genocide while murdering hundreds of thousands of people. This does not even consider with the war crimes that were committed against civilians, and the thousands of instances where they use chemical and biological weapons to murder untold numbers of people.

              Japan was a fascist country with an absolutely brutal military that had zero respect for any life. Their military leadership evem attempted to coup to dispose of their emperor after Hiroshima and Nagasaki were nuked, as they did not want the war to end at any cost.

              It’s a little difficult to find empathy for a culture who considers absolute loyalty to the emperor and the military a prerequisite for existence. A culture where you are expected to follow any order, including suicide on a moment’s notice.

              • o_d [he/him]
                link
                fedilink
                01 year ago

                Did you really just write 3 paragraphs in defence of both vaporizing and radiation poisoning hundreds of thousands of civilians who mostly had literally nothing to do with the atrocities that you speak of? Disgusting.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  1
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  In a war that killed what, 50 million people? The US and Russia were gearing up to send roughly 10 million soldiers to invade Japan. That would have been far worse. Tens of millions would have died.

                  In fact, to this day virtually every easy Asian nation that suffered from Japanese aggression had blamed Japan for the war and has sought a public apology, for which Japan has refused to give. It is a major sore spot in relations.

                  So yes I did.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                -31 year ago

                I find it hard to find empathy for ignorant Americans such as yourself but I don’t advocate murdering innocent civilians with a WMD because your government breaks international laws.

  • AutoTL;DRB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    71 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    A political divide on the issue has steadily grown, with the Republican-led House facing enormous pressure to demonstrate support for the party’s leader, Donald Trump, who has been very skeptical of the war.

    As a supplemental request, the package the White House is sending to Congress falls outside the budget caps both parties agreed to as part of the debt ceiling showdown earlier this year.

    “I look forward to carefully reviewing the Administration’s request to make sure it is necessary and appropriate,” McConnell said in a statement, “to keep America safe, secure our borders, support our allies, and help communities rebuild after disasters.”

    Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., released a statement urging Congress to swiftly pass critical funding for disaster relief programs while separately considering military aid for Ukraine.

    Members of Congress have repeatedly pressed Defense Department leaders on how closely the U.S. is tracking its aid to Ukraine to ensure that it is not subject to fraud or ending up in the wrong hands.

    Now, though, House Speaker McCarthy is facing pressure to impeach Biden over unproven claims of financial misconduct and it’s not clear whether a quick show of support for Ukraine could cause political damage in what’s expected to be a bruising 2024 reelection campaign.


    I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • albigu
    link
    fedilink
    5
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Oh hey, it’s a Parenti quote moment.

    And when Kenneth Boulding gets up and he says—an economist, and you can see what—you can see what—you can see, when you get Britain people like Kenneth Boulding speaking so naïvely, you can see the troubles you get into, the swamps you go into, the baby talk—silliness you get into when you think without Marx, when you think without class analysis—and Kenneth Boulding says, one of America’s leading economists, he says, “Empire is irrational because it costs more than what we get out of it,” “the British—it costed them more in India than what they got out of it,” “the American investment in the Philippines is only about three-and-a-half billion dollars, but we had to give them about six billion dollars in aid,” “it costs us more than what we get out of it,” and that’s when you think without a class analysis, because as we know—as you’re going to know before the evening’s over— that it’s very profitable, because the people who have the three billion dollar investment aren’t the same ones as the people who pay the six billion.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      11 year ago

      Foreign aid is when the poor people of a rich country give money to the rich people of a poor country!

  • Gamey
    link
    fedilink
    31 year ago

    Squeeze ut all in one pckage so people have a hard time saying no because they would deny Ukraine help…

  • Echo71Niner
    link
    fedilink
    -27
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    White House national security spokesman John Kirby is a joke.

      • circuitfarmer
        link
        fedilink
        -331 year ago

        Well, yes. But I also worry that student loan aid is now a red herring to ignore a lot of other issues.

        • wrath-sedan
          link
          fedilink
          451 year ago

          “Wow, I wish Biden would spend 40 billion on US priorities”
          “Here’s how Biden helped cancel 66 billion in student debt.”
          “Actually that’s a red herring.”

          Like, I don’t love Biden either and wish he were more progressive in a WIDE variety of areas, but we should also give credit where credit is due. Also between the Inflation Reduction Act ($400b), American Rescue Plan ($1.9t), and the Infrastructure bill ($1t) there are literally trillions of dollars in additional domestic spending that would not have existed otherwise.

            • wrath-sedan
              link
              fedilink
              141 year ago

              He’s been a mixed bag on the environment, opening up more oil and gas leases on federal land (although he did just create a new national monument around the Grand Canyon to create more protected land which was a big win for Arizona tribes and environmentalists). I also wish that he would make a harder voting rights push if only to make the issue more visible even if he can’t do much without congress. And while the border policy is an improvement (not saying much compared to Trump lol), there is still a lot of capricious and arbitrary enforcement against asylum seekers and immigrants that the Biden admin has purposefully continued. Tbf border policy is ultimately something Congress needs to deal with, so it’s not going to see any specific changes for awhile.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              11 year ago

              Medicare

              Packing the courts

              Regulating student loans

              Providing more urban housing

              Fighting domestic drug use

              Addressing homelessness

              More transit

              Fund schools

              Unions

          • circuitfarmer
            link
            fedilink
            -151 year ago

            Are those trillions going into the pockets of Americans? Even calling the student debt relief a win compared to the original promise is disingenuous.

            All I’m saying is: every politician will have a few wins. Normally it’s just enough to satiate the base. Biden has done that. But that doesn’t make him a progressive and realistically we need more than that, as a country.

            Corpo leader for a corpo country, but it’s not where most people actually want to be.

            • wrath-sedan
              link
              fedilink
              131 year ago

              No, I agree those trillions won’t go directly to people and time will tell how well it’s spent. Some of that money has gone to individuals, some has gone to companies and orgs that build things like roads, and some has been and will be skimmed off the top because of course it will be. I think the overall benefits will outweigh the costs and it’s better to do something rather than nothing but who knows.

              Also, he did try to cancel 400b in student debt which was shot down by the conservative Supreme Court, and so he’s used the legal tools he has left to cancel as much as he can.

              Can definitely agree on asking more from our leaders, and I think the good things Biden has done definitely come from the voter base shifting left on a lot of issues, and not because he’s some sort of progressive champion.

              • @Torvum
                link
                1
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                It was “shot down” because congress was not allocating the funds he wanted to spend to enact the relief. How dare the court actually uphold the constitution in respect to checks and balances and not let the president use executive power to supersede congressional debates and hearings.

                It’s so disingenuous to fight for something because you find it morally right in idea without understanding every nuance of the path it follows. I’d like young adults relieved of the debt economy we’re building just as much as anyone else, but not at the expense of our institutional sanctity. Bad precedent is a slope.

                E: meanwhile our dipshit congressmen that wouldn’t allow the funds allocated are allowing 40 billion to foreign aid and repeatedly fueling our debt economy. Unironically indict Congress on corruption charges.

                • czech
                  link
                  fedilink
                  2
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  40 billion to foreign aid

                  It’s disingenuous to frame the best defense budget ROI we’ve seen in decades as “fueling our debt economy”.

                  Bad precedent is a slope

                  I’m not sure you’re very up do date on current events of the last century if you think this is setting a precedent.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              1
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              A lot of those trillions are funding business expansion, which will fund high paying jobs so more of economic stimulus, a bit like the progress administration from the 1930s. But in this case, we are building domestic manufacturing capabilities which will employ people as well as help with decarbonization.

              Business is generally won’t get the money unless they spend it, so it is much better than trickle down.

    • Saganastic
      link
      fedilink
      44
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Russia is waging war. The US wants to support a free democratic country that borders NATO over a fascist invading country that’s an adversary of NATO.

      • Bloops
        link
        fedilink
        -14
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Ukraine banned the largest opposition party in the legislature. How does that make it a free and democratic country? The truth is it’s no more free and no more democratic than Russia.

      • sobuddywhoneedsyou
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -151 year ago

        Out of the numerous countries that the USA has invaded, couped, meddled in or intervened in, which ones have become free and democratic enough to your liking?

        • @mashbooq
          link
          161 year ago

          The terrible actions of the US don’t justify russia’s genocide

        • Saganastic
          link
          fedilink
          0
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Afghanistan was democratic during US occupation. Unfortunately, that was overthrown by the taliban when the US pulled out.

              • sobuddywhoneedsyou
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -31 year ago

                Your own source contradicts your claims:

                Prior to the 2021 overthrow of the government by the Taliban, Afghanistan had been consistently ranked as a below-average democracy by U.S.-based non-governmental organization Freedom House. According to their yearly survey Freedom in the World, Afghanistan scored only 27 points in 2019 to 2021 on a 100-point scale, falling in the category of “not free countries.”

                In 2010, a report published by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime indicated that bribery consumed approximately 23% of the GDP of Afghanistan.[8] This corruption was present in the highest levels of government, with the New Kabul Bank scandal in which a small number of political elites, including cabinet ministers, had embezzled nearly $1 billion through fraudulent loan schemes.[9][10]

                While the first presidential election of the republic in 2004 was relatively peaceful, the following 2009 presidential election was hampered by significant flaws, including a lack of security, low voter turnout, and widespread electoral fraud.[11]

                All this is after being chartiable and not including the 20% voter turnout in 2021 since that was the tail end of that epoch.

                But I bet you’ll blame all these shortcomings on the Afghans.

                • Saganastic
                  link
                  fedilink
                  31 year ago

                  Oof, that’ll teach me to briefly skim a source before posting. I wasn’t going to blame anyone, because I clearly don’t know enough about the situation. But thanks for putting words in my mouth.

                • Pseu
                  link
                  fedilink
                  11 year ago

                  Man, this was a great comment until the last sentence. . .

              • Bloops
                link
                fedilink
                -61 year ago

                So Ukraine should become permanently occupied by America?

                • @M0oP0o
                  link
                  91 year ago

                  You do know there are other options then occupied by russia or america right?

            • Saganastic
              link
              fedilink
              111 year ago

              Keep the propaganda coming, troll. Your comments are shallow and not representative of reality.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              61 year ago

              cite yah sources and I’ll read into it. I view it as providing aid to a foreign population being invaded by a direct adversary of the people of the United States. The Ukrainian people need saving from Putin’s senseless and ultimately fruitless invasion of their homes. Russians should be embarrassed for how much pain they’ve inflicted, as well as how little they’ve accomplished in this pointless errand to fulfill Putin’s selfish dying wish.

            • @M0oP0o
              link
              11 year ago

              Why don’t you have a vote on it then?

              • Bloops
                link
                fedilink
                31 year ago

                That’s not how representative democracies work. There’s no way for a commoner to vote on it.

                • @M0oP0o
                  link
                  31 year ago

                  Fair point, a referendum then. (also please fix your democracy America, its getting weird)

        • Skua
          link
          fedilink
          131 year ago

          “imperialism is when America does things, and the more American it is the more imperialismer it is”

          Other countries can be imperialist too. Like Russia, when it invades its neighbours to annex their territory. Stop defending imperialism. A thing does not automatically become anti-imperialist if the USA doesn’t like it.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            51 year ago

            Ad hominem fallacy

            I’m not embarrassed I had to look it up, but I’m glad I did!

            Ad hominem (Latin for ‘to the person’), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a term that refers to several types of arguments, most of which are fallacious. Typically this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself. This avoids genuine debate by creating a diversion to some irrelevant but often highly charged issue. The most common form of this fallacy is “A makes a claim x, B asserts that A holds a property that is unwelcome, and hence B concludes that argument x is wrong”.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      161 year ago

      Putin wouldn’t be the first guy I’d call “progressive,” if that’s what you’re getting at

    • Bloops
      link
      fedilink
      -31 year ago

      No it’s not. Well, unless it’s an anti-fascist war. But as much as Biden loves to say he’s just like FDR, this war is no WW2.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    -461 year ago

    Where is the off ramp here? Despite billions and constant propaganda Russia is not going to lose this war on the battlefield.

    How much money and how many people are we going to just send to their deaths just because prolonging the conflict weakens an adversary to US.

    It’s really sad :(

    • @M0oP0o
      link
      381 year ago

      I am assuming you are an American, so I think you have sent no one.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        231 year ago

        Pretty much. All US veterans who have died in Ukraine were volunteers. Just about everything we’ve given Ukraine is old military equipment we don’t need, and it accounts for such a small amount in the total budget while absolutely fucking the greatest threat to Europe at the moment. It might be the best ROI we’ve ever gotten from anything ever.

        This is coming from someone who is extremely anti-war, but that doesn’t make me anti-defend yourself.

        • @Yaglis
          link
          81 year ago

          The original commenter is probably a troll or an idiot whose idea of peace is to put down your own weapon and raise your ass in the air and await the invader to come and fuck it.

          Peace with Russia is not possible. The world attempted peace with Russia in 2014 after Russia said they would not invade more of Ukraine after Crimea, now the “peace advocates” want Ukraine to give up 1/3 of their country to appease Russia and “stop” the war. At this rate Eastern Europe will be part of Russia within a few short decades.

          The war is not over until every millimeter has been retaken and Russia is pushed out.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            1
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The United States also gave tens of billions of dollars worth of aid following the collapse of the Soviet Union to Russia. We paid to have all of their nuclear material secured, including providing security detail at all of their nuclear sites. And this is how they repay us.

    • EnderWi99in
      link
      fedilink
      12
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Oddly enough the US makes it back in many ways as it’s being fulfilled by US military contractors. So it’s not as much of a loss financially as it seems. It’s also geopolitically a good cause as bolstering support in Europe has netted a ton of contracts Russia was fulfilling for gas and coal. Ukraine is also a US ally and likely future member of both the EU and NATO, so it makes sense to support them when invaded for absolutely no rhyme or reason by pretty much the most consistent adversary of the US throughout modern history. But I’m sure whatever you said makes sense too.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        -131 year ago

        I agree it has helped the us economy. Wow we are the real heroes here… Europe now turns to us for gas/energy … military contracts getting filled… ohh who cares about the actual Ukrainians dying at least they are not US citizens …

        Honestly disgusting

        • Skua
          link
          fedilink
          121 year ago

          So you’d just abandon them to Russian imperialism? Yeah that’s historically gone fucking great for Ukrainians. I can’t possibly imagine why they’d be against that.

          Ukraine was fighting the invasion before the West started sending them guns anyway. Ukraine is choosing to fight whether it has support or not.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            11 year ago

            You want to abandon the people in Ukraine to fuckers with SS Totenkopf patches on their uniform? Yeah that’s historically gone fucking great for Ukrainians. I can’t possibly imagine why they’d be against.

            • Skua
              link
              fedilink
              -11 year ago

              I’m sorry, who is actually running Ukraine? Is it the Azov lot and their like?

              One of the two sides of this war has warmongering ultranationalists in government. It’s not Ukraine.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                31 year ago

                Zelenskiy just a couple of weeks ago did a photo op with Azov fighters. The Ukrainian government gives money and arms and propaganda support to Neo-Nazis. No other government does that. Even Russian Neo-Nazis are fighting for Ukraine. Yes the Ukrainian government is ethnonationalist.

                Zelenskiy:

                There are indisputable heroes. Stepan Bandera is a hero for a certain part of Ukrainians, and this is a normal and cool thing. He was one of those who defended the freedom of Ukraine. But I think that when we name so many streets, bridges by the same name, this is not quite right.

                Such a brave push back on the Nazis. He has a point. Naming every street and bridge after Bandera is going to be confusing, I’m sure the Nazis will agree.

                • Skua
                  link
                  fedilink
                  01 year ago

                  If your proposed plan for dealing with the likes of Azov is “let Putin’s Russia win” then you do not actually have a problem with the far right being in power in Ukraine, you just have a preference in your flavour of far right. Frankly if I were in Zelenskiy’s position and a fascist told me he wanted to go die to defend democracy from other fascists, I’m not about to discourage him, I’m gonna chalk it up as a win-win

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      71 year ago

      Ya know there’s a country called Ukraine that’s involved in this, right? They are people defending their country and they’re going to do that with or without US support. And Ukraine will win in the end. Russia doesn’t have enough to successfully occupy Ukraine against an organized resistance which is where things could go without military aid from the west.

      While a resistance would ultimately be successful, it would take a decade or more. And it’s likely a Russian occupation of Ukraine would involve genocide. Do you want that?

      Sending military aid isn’t about trying to change the outcome of the war. Russia’s defeat is inevitable. The military aid is about helping Ukraine defeat Russia sooner, without the need for a prolonged resistance campaign, and that reduces the loss of life.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -11 year ago

      Why won’t Russia stop the war?

      Why did Vladimir Putin claim that Ukraine isn’t a country?

      Why does Russia purchase Iranian suicide drones, and launch drone and cruise missile attacks on Ukrainian cities every week?

      Why do Russians want to kill all Ukrainians when they were considered brothers 2 years ago?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    -461 year ago

    More money being pissed away on Ukraine? Wow. That Zalensky guy must have photos of a naked Biden with some White House aide or whatever. This is a joke and a massive abuse of US taxpayer money. When does this end? How is the US benefitting from this? Oh, we aren’t at all. Hmmm. I wonder if there is something behind the scenes going on here? Like some other motive? I mean, it’s the Biden’s…… sort of a shady track record.

    And don’t gimme a bunch of whataboutisms either. Don’t care. This Ukraine thing is a farce. Enough. We’re done.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      191 year ago

      It’s kind of funny seeing these kind of comments on Lemmy and playing the “alt-right or tankie” game before you see someones instance.

      What we as the west get from helping Ukriane, is soft power in that it sends a message to other dictators around the world that we won’t just sit back and let them plough into another country, and while we might not start WW3 over it, we will support them to make it hard as possible for you.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      151 year ago

      We’re giving Ukraine our table scraps that are too nice to toss, but too expensive to keep. They’re using them to defeat a long-standing geopolitical foe at no costs to American lives.

      Ukraine doesn’t need dirt to get our help, this is the best money the US has spent since Lend-Lease.

    • @ilickfrogs
      link
      121 year ago

      Go touch yourself to a printout of shirtless Putin on a horse. Jesus.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        -131 year ago

        Right, because there isn’t possibly any other motives here or objectives. Like the circus guys said: There’s. Sucker born every minute.

        • @Baphomet_The_Blasphemer
          link
          41 year ago

          The fact you can’t see that you’re the sucker isn’t a surprise to anyone but you. Stop watching fox news, it’s rotting your brain.

          • jwiggler
            link
            fedilink
            -2
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The fact that you’re assuming this person is a Fox “News” consumer is emblematic of the overall media’s coverage of the war in Ukraine. A person can be anti-war and still part of the left. But not according to you, or others who immediately jump to things like, “go back to licking Putins boot, watching Fox News, etc.” You are shutting down any sort of constructive conversation.

            The media has made the war in Ukraine a moral imperative by making it democratic Ukraine vs authoritarian Russia. War makes everything black and white. So it becomes impossible to say something like, “Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is wrong” while also saying “The US should not support Ukraine with weapons.”

            I am anti-war. I do not think the US should support Ukraine with weapons. To me, I am extremely skeptical of the simplistic idea that we are aiding democracy and staunching authoritarianism. I think that kind of of rhetoric pervaded the conflicts in the Middle East, and I think in those cases, it was more accepted by the public that the US was acting in a more imperialistic manner. I think that fits closer to the mark here, too.

            For one thing, the US was directly involved in Ukraine’s revolution in 2014, trying to position people in power who had a more EU friendly demeanor. And they helped expand NATO bases closer to Russian borders. These two things, while they certainly do not justify Russia’s invasion, I’m sure made them feel threatened. Now, I don’t have much historical knowledge of Ukraine or Russia, but certainly they’ve had more than just a geographic relationship over the past century or so. If Russia was involved in a Mexican revolution, trying to make them friendlier to Russia rather than the US, I’m sure the US would have a problem with that. Still, the US would not be justified in invading Mexico, as Russia is not justified in invading the Ukraine. This is just to point out the same type of meddling that the US does all across the globe in the name of “democracy” or “free market capitalism”, we were doing here, too.

            I think it’s doubtful that this is all purely in the name of democracy. After all, look at what is happening to Palestine. They are a country occupied by the authoritarian state of Israel, and we do nothing. So, to me, there are other factors at play in Ukraine. One, I think, is that war is profitable. “Defense” companies like Raytheon and BAE actually have an interest in perpetuating war, as it brings in profits. So big firms are going to support giant aid packages, as it means they’re going to get business.

            Another, I think, is that war is politically profitable. When you can get your party to demonize an individual or country and unite around the noble war effort, it’s just another issue you’ve manufactured to get their vote.

            Anyways. I just don’t buy that this war is about democracy or any higher moral value. I think it’s about money, to be honest, and politics. Mostly money. It’s a proxy war between the US and Russia and I think the media has pushed the narrative that it is a morally imperative war between Ukraine and Russia because it is financially interested in perpetuating the conflict. I don’t think the US has an interest in actually ending the war.

            And overall, I just think war is one of the greatest evils, and I will almost never support it. Real people are dying for fucking what? If that makes me a Fox News watcher, or conservative, or Putin lover, or whatever name you want to sling my way, I guess so be it. It’s dumb, but so be it.

            Edit: if you’re downvoting me without a rebuttal, you’re part of the problem that I’m referring to – a complete dismissal of dissenting opinion on the war. If you disagree with what I’ve said, please comment why because I’d like to hear your viewpoint so that I can adjust mine appropriately. I’m not interested in name-calling, but an actual conversation about this topic would be cool.

            • @pedalmore
              link
              21 year ago

              Your entire rant boils down to “I disagree with Russia’s invasion, but since they did it anyway they should have no consequences, even when they commit genocide”. A conversation isn’t required to counter this dogshit position.

              • jwiggler
                link
                fedilink
                -21 year ago

                Well, I actually didn’t say any of that, but thanks for stripping any nuance from what I said, creating a strawman, and then attacking that, instead.

                • @pedalmore
                  link
                  21 year ago

                  No amount of nuance will make your core position tenable to those that think Ukraine deserves outside (e.g. NATO) support to protect them from the Russian invaders. You simply don’t think Ukraine deserves support, condemning them to genocide. Everything else you said is weird posturing to try and disguise your actual point. It’s not our first rodeo, we can all see right through this.

            • Anomander
              link
              fedilink
              21 year ago

              Edit: if you’re downvoting me without a rebuttal, you’re part of the problem that I’m referring to – a complete dismissal of dissenting opinion on the war. If you disagree with what I’ve said, please comment why

              People on the internet don’t owe you a debate.

              Especially when the prompt is a somewhat sanctimonious effort-dump sealioning “we should let Russia have Ukraine” as if its a reasonable liberal imperative, all in response to a stupid one-liner.

              • jwiggler
                link
                fedilink
                -3
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Thank you for the insults, I guess the point of my effort dump is moreso that I dont think it’s really as black and white as people make it, I think it deserves some nuance. Which is a little ironic because you summed the whole thing up in six words! Haha

                But no, I don’t think it’s very unreasonable to be against a war. You do? I do not support Russia. But I don’t think the US should be sending military aid to Ukraine.

                Edit: or, I mean against this war

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            -61 year ago

            When you stop watching The View, MSNBC & The Rachel Madcow show, Ill consider dumping Fox News. :).

            • @Baphomet_The_Blasphemer
              link
              11 year ago

              I already don’t watch any of that drivel so you got yourself a deal buddy. You just go ahead and let me know when you want to uphold your end and dump fox news.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                -21 year ago

                My end? Did we make some sort of pact? Please. Face it: everyone has their favorite sources for stuff and it’s always based on what they agree with. You’re not above this.

                • @Baphomet_The_Blasphemer
                  link
                  11 year ago

                  You said you’d consider dumping fox news when I stopped watching the programs you mentioned. That sounded like a pact to me.

                  The problem with all news media these days is it no longer gives you the facts without it also telling you how you should feel about the facts based on their particular biases. If you only look to the sources that confirm your bias you’re not getting properly informed on the issues, you’re simply existing in an echo chamber having your views reaffirmed by the others that share them without ever hearing or considering there might be more to the story.

                  I never claimed to be above being affected by this myself, but I am consciously aware of how serious a problem it is. I do the best I’m able to see all sides of an issue, from multiple sources, the more non-biased the better (though this is getting increasingly more difficult), and then I make up my own mind as to what I think without allowing the media to tell me how I should feel.

                  Fox news is one of the worst sources for biased news as it is the only news network that was started with the agenda of specifically appealing towards a conservative audience. They have even won defamation lawsuits by arguing their shows are performances and shouldn’t be taken as fact. They’ve always cared more about ratings than the truth… MSNBC is a close second on spewing drivel catering to liberals. I wouldn’t trust anything either of them say without first doing some independent research on my own.

    • Saganastic
      link
      fedilink
      91 year ago

      Supporting free and democratic Ukraine is preferable to letting fascist Russia become neighbors with NATO.

      • Skua
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago

        I agree wholeheartedly with supporting Ukraine, but Russia has had a land border with NATO for twenty years at this point. They just pretend they don’t so that they can cry “NATO expansionism!”

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      71 year ago

      When does this end?

      When Russia is defeated.

      How is the US benefitting from this?

      It’s sending a message to authoritarians. Don’t invade countries or we’ll send the other country stuff to make it go badly for you. This has a chilling effect on authoritarians, making them refrain from this kind of activity. This improves global security, which results in better trade, which improves the global economy. The US being on the globe benefits from this.

      Also, do you like how much you’re paying for groceries? Could it be this war is causing a disruption in grain supply? You know that stuff that goes into bread, the feed that cows eat, etc? Yeah, I know people on the internet are all blaming their own governments (in basically every country, LOL) for high grocery prices, because no one wants to say that’s it’s Putin. Sure there is probably some assholes jacking up the prices more than necessary, but do you think all the corporations and all of the governments got together and decided to do this? Nope the inflation, the high grocery prices, it’s because of Putin’s bullshit.

      Not to mention all of the influence campaigns Russia is running on the internet. You know where you’re constantly being influenced by the internet towards burning down the capital of your own country? That’s a disinformation campaign designed to destabilize NATO countries. Taking down Putin will lessen that buillshit. I say lessen because after seeing Russia’s success other countries like China are getting in on that game now too. But one asshole at a time.

    • SatansMaggotyCumFart
      link
      541 year ago

      Would you prefer that the world turn its back on Ukraine and let Russia continue to invade them without support?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        501 year ago

        Yeah, he would. There are lots of people who would rather bend over for Russia than think for one second. Putin has zero love for America and actively attacks our infrastructure and companies by sponsoring hackers. If you support Russia you are a traitor or an idiot.

            • SatansMaggotyCumFart
              link
              361 year ago

              How does Ukraine start negotiating with a country that has invaded theirs?

              • Bloops
                link
                fedilink
                -31 year ago

                Probably the same way that’s been done for centuries? Armistice, followed by a peace treaty?

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  11 year ago

                  Like the deal they already had as part of Ukraine giving up its nukes, that Putin ignored to invade this time?

              • queermunist she/her
                link
                fedilink
                -221 year ago

                The same way anyone starts negotiating with anyone: open a dialogue and exchange demands, and then work to make concessions and compromises. They won’t do that, though, because then the infinite money spigot from the US will shut off because America doesn’t want this war to ever end.

                • SatansMaggotyCumFart
                  link
                  241 year ago

                  You think Ukraine should make concessions with the country that invaded them?

                • SpicyPeaSoup
                  link
                  fedilink
                  191 year ago

                  You tell me where you live, I’ll break into your house and steal half your stuff.

                  Instead of fighting back or calling the police, we can negotiate so I can have half your stuff. Sound good?

                • pingveno
                  link
                  fedilink
                  19
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  I doubt Ukraine will demand anything less than Russia pulling out of previous held lands. Russia will doubtless demand all lands it currently occupies (and maybe even ones it claims but does not occupy). Russia’s demand could be cast as peace, though really it involves giving a massive portion of Ukraine to Russia. And if you’re thinking that might be temporary… well, just ask Finland, which lost 9% of its territory to a peace agreement in the Winter War after the Soviet Union invaded them.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          81 year ago

          Oh yeah cuz Putin has just seemed so open to peace, dipshit… it’s not like it hasn’t been tried about countless times. He doesn’t want peace, he just wants everything handed to him with zero consequence

        • @mashbooq
          link
          21 year ago

          russia is the only one preventing those

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          Ok, and what do you think they would look like exactly? Unless Russia are willing to leave Ukraine, there’s little to talk about.

        • @jcit878
          link
          -11 year ago

          id prefer HIMARS instantly raining down on every last invader without a white flag in the sky. fuck em and the cookers supporting the genocide

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              0
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              What nuclear weapons? The fuel got sold for vodka money and the tritium has decayed away to uselessness with Russia giving up on producing more

              • queermunist she/her
                link
                fedilink
                -4
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                If that were true, do you think America and its allies could resist total war? They’d just bomb the whole country to ashes.

                “By a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.”

      • PatFusty
        link
        fedilink
        -38
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I personally dont give a fuck about Ukraine so yes. I give as much of a fuck for Ukraine as much as I give a fuck about whats going on in Sudan or Sri Lanka.

        I. Dont. Care.

        Those hundreds of billions of dollars are given to the banks to perpetuate this stupid war. Only ~5% of all the money donated to them has been humanitarian. The rest goes to the war machine.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          221 year ago

          Those hundreds of billions of dollars are given to the banks to perpetuate this stupid war

          Where did you glean this

          • @BassTurd
            link
            241 year ago

            Straight out of their asshole.

            • PatFusty
              link
              fedilink
              -91 year ago

              I dont need to post any proof. You guys dont ever read any sources anyways so whats the point.

              • @BassTurd
                link
                41 year ago

                “Bro, just believe me, I definitely didn’t just make all of this shit up.”.

                -you

                • PatFusty
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -71 year ago

                  How about this. Lets meet in the middle. You come up with a source that is in contrary and ill come up with a source thats in favor and we can have a discussion. Otherwise, you just want a source that you can easily disqualify.

        • @PunnyName
          link
          181 year ago

          Could you provide some sources on those claims?

        • Silverseren
          link
          fedilink
          91 year ago

          How is giving dust-collecting weapons and tanks giving money to the banks exactly?

          You realize that the monetary amount above isn’t actual money, right? It’s the worth of the goods being given that we weren’t using anyways.

        • @mashbooq
          link
          -21 year ago

          Ok, so you’re a bad person, that’s all