It became our position when our money became involved.
What could you possibly be thinking to suggest otherwise?
The Ukraine war. (Yes, we'll mind our manners)
- Thread starter BigBlueFanGA
- Start date
What could you possibly be thinking to suggest otherwise?
Good gods man, you're better than this. I hadn't lumped you in with that misbegotten collection of rubes, but I guess in this day and age it's good to know that I can still be surprised by something.
You seem to believe that giving aid means we get to dictate policy. That's a false presumption.
It’s a ridiculous position to take, regardless of who you are pointing at. This can be debated sincerely without calling people Nazis or Putin appeasers. Because a person does not see a vital US interest, it does not mean they favor Putin or Russia. Even if, as Cornell West complains, a person can see how the US needled this move or failed to take truly preemptive measures to stop it, that does not mean they agree with Putin.
It demeans the discussion to the third grade playground and makes you seem less confident in your stance.
And, BTW, @entropy13, your broad brush was pointed at a poster who was sincerely responding to my post. So, to say now who and who not it was directed is a little late.
Oh, and I have called for peace talks. In fact, I continue to predict that is eventually how this ends. After a lot of death and money.
Oh, and I have called for peace talks. In fact, I continue to predict that is eventually how this ends. After a lot of death and money.
A peace treaty with russia means jackshit. Russia will just rearm their millitary, make more missles, and tanks, and try again in 10 years. They've already violated treaty after treaty they signed in the 90s regarding Ukraine being nuke free for Russia promising not to invade them.
I have said this before. A brokered peace would include a clear (5-10 years with milestone requirements or the like) path to NATO for Ukraine.
And, with a stronger president, this war is probably averted.
Even CNN is discouraged.
Seems it depends on your source as to whether Ukraine is making any progress or not.
It’s staggering that there are people (like you) who believe that we should waste money we don’t have on a war that’s lost.
100 billion and counting. Our national debt is now starting to affect our economic stability and yet we are told we can’t dictate policy.
Gains in the south for the UAF, the first Russian (Surovikin) defensive line has been breached and they are fighting for Urozhaine.
Gains on the left bank of the Dnipro, where it looks like Oleshky and some other river towns are surrounded that were under control of the invaders. Gains north and south of Bakhmut.
No one said progress would be fast, and many were hoping for quicker advances during the counteroffensive, but even small gains are gains. To say the war is “lost” by some simpletons here is simply laughable.
So Z is still begging for F-16’s. My whole thing, if/when they get them, what if they get destroyed quick like it appears a lot of Bradley’s have been?
You realize we aren't actually sending 100 billion to Ukraine correct? The dollar counts are all of our old millitary equipment we are sending in dollar value.
Assuming for arguments sake I take this is true, it's probably worse than sending straight cash. It means we're risking world war by proxy using old outdated equipment that doesn't even give our proxy the best chance to win.
I do quite enjoy all the downplaying of the massive piles of cash sent to the Ukraine combined with the bonus highbrow condescension for anyone who thinks that money should at least be audited. This is especially so when you consider they apparently aren't purchasing equipment with it. Where is it all going?
Last edited:
I do quite enjoy are the harping on the money spent on Ukraine when it's a drop in the bucket compared to the total pure government waste that never gets mentioned. You have to have a real hard on to single out this money. Very entertaining.
Our ''outdated'' equipment Aka stuff from the 80s and 90s is still good compared to old soviet-era weapons. And not sure I understand your 2nd paragraph. The US is not sending CASH to Ukraine.
lol sure maybe not pallets of CASH that we are aware of like what was sent to Iran.
We are certainly paying some of their bills for them.
BY ANGELO FICHERA
Published 8:10 PM EDT, March 7, 2023
Share
CLAIM: The U.S. is not providing cash to Ukraine; it only supports the country through donated military equipment.
AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. While the U.S. is indeed providing weapons and equipment to Ukraine, it has also provided billions in financial assistance to the country following Russia’s invasion.
THE FACTS: Former Congressman Adam Kinzinger, a Republican from Illinois, made the inaccurate suggestion recently while taking aim at Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, who has been critical of U.S. aid to Ukraine.
“People like MTG in re: #Ukraine. The aid is not pallets of cash. It’s in the form of military equipment, assigned a value, that is donated,” Kinzinger wrote in a tweet. “That equipment is usually older and would be replaced in the next few years anyway, at a cost. I’m sure she doesn’t understand this.”
cont'd
Between January 2022 and January 2023, the U.S. committed more than $26 billion to Ukraine in financial assistance, according to data compiled by the Ukraine Support Tracker at the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, a German think tank. That’s about a third of the roughly $77 billion in total aid noted by Kiel, including humanitarian and military assistance, pledged by the U.S. government. The numbers represent money promised, not entirely distributed.
https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-us-aid-ukraine-money-equipment-714688682747
Published 8:10 PM EDT, March 7, 2023
Share
CLAIM: The U.S. is not providing cash to Ukraine; it only supports the country through donated military equipment.
AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. While the U.S. is indeed providing weapons and equipment to Ukraine, it has also provided billions in financial assistance to the country following Russia’s invasion.
THE FACTS: Former Congressman Adam Kinzinger, a Republican from Illinois, made the inaccurate suggestion recently while taking aim at Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, who has been critical of U.S. aid to Ukraine.
“People like MTG in re: #Ukraine. The aid is not pallets of cash. It’s in the form of military equipment, assigned a value, that is donated,” Kinzinger wrote in a tweet. “That equipment is usually older and would be replaced in the next few years anyway, at a cost. I’m sure she doesn’t understand this.”
cont'd
Between January 2022 and January 2023, the U.S. committed more than $26 billion to Ukraine in financial assistance, according to data compiled by the Ukraine Support Tracker at the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, a German think tank. That’s about a third of the roughly $77 billion in total aid noted by Kiel, including humanitarian and military assistance, pledged by the U.S. government. The numbers represent money promised, not entirely distributed.
https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-us-aid-ukraine-money-equipment-714688682747
It’s amazing that the President was part of the administration that literally sent pallets of cash to a terrorist state, and we have to explain there are ways to send “cash” that doesn’t involve actually sending physical paper money.
Are you really such a skinflint? I think you need a reality check. Those in favor of caving to Putin immediately were calling anyone who opposed the idea warmongers. The appeasenik moniker was quid pro quo.
Crimea river, dude. The broad brush fits. He's been leading the charge for the appeasenik faction on here for a while.
Here's the thing, I, and plenty of other people, don't see it was wasting money. Our national debt is largely due to a structural imbalance that our political class has shown a great amount of cowardice in dealing with. I agree, it's a major issue, but pretending that aid to Ukraine is the straw the broke the camel's back is just not grounded in reality.
Also, wanted to add a couple of other things to demonstrate the ridiculousness of your and other appeaseniks' position. If you're so worried about the "flower of Ukrainian youth," maybe you could condemn Russia's kidnapping of anywhere between 19,000-700,000 Ukrainian children at least as much as you condemn the very idea of giving Ukraine a fighting chance.
Also, in case you missed it, Russia launched the war for geopolitical gain. As an appeasenik, at least you're true to your colors. Perfectly OK with the geopolitical gain for one of our strategic adversaries, but adamantly opposed to the U.S. and allies taking a stand against it.
Giving Ukraine a fighting chance to what?
No reasonable person would think opposition to continued US funding and escalation is support of Russia kidnapping children.
Many of us are far more concerned about the American youth and the country that’s being left for them, than we are with continuing to find forever wars that benefit no one outside of defense contractors and connected politicians.
Skinflint? Yeah, I think you picked the wrong pejorative, but I am sure you have other ad hominem arguments that will make you feel better.
Ha, guilty as charged! Thin-skinned was what I meant. But skinflint w/r/t to Ukrainian aid also fits. 😋 Again, the "warmongers vs. appeaseniks" thing has been going on in this and the prior thread for months. Why it got you so personally wound up is beyond me. Maybe don't take things so personally?
More like people who understand what a Russian victory would mean vs Tucker Carlson fanboys.
Let's assume that's all accurate. If we're going to start a proxy war why do it unless we're going to use the real equipment?
By these parameters, using modern equipment there would probably already be "victory".
Literally none of it makes sense.
If they had the ability to exercise even the slightest bit of logic or critical thought, this thread would have ended 1.5 years ago.
Your government at work:
theintercept.com
Secret Pakistan Cable Documents U.S. Pressure to Remove Imran Khan
“All will be forgiven,” said a U.S. diplomat, if the no-confidence vote against Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan succeeds.
theintercept.com
I just responded in kind to show the childishness of it. It was your friend who got all worked up. Talk to that skinflint.
If it looks like Russia is going to win, would you then say we need to officially enter this war? Would it be that dire?
Oh yes, you're so high-minded. 🙄 Funny how you only chose to chime in now and only call out the side that happens to disagree with you. At least "appeasenik" is accurate, whereas neither "warmonger" nor "nazi lover" are. Your argument is phony. I really do feel sorry for you, getting so wound up at being called out as an appeasenik. Kinda reminds me of the time Cal called Jerry Tipton:
Now, please do continue your yelping Or, maybe try not being a cry-bully.
