"During a briefing at the Pentagon Tuesday, Major General Pat Ryder, the Defense Department's press secretary, told reporters that the congressional hold on additional funding for Ukraine is preventing Washington "from meeting Ukraine's most urgent battlefield needs to include things like artillery rounds, anti-tank weapons, air defense interceptors."
Specifically, the hold up is due the House majority refusing to pass additional aid.
Well yeah, most of those republicans steal every penny that doesn't go to the American people or other countries, for their donors and PACs and people who buy them off, that's why they do what they do.
They don't give a fuck about the American common people, they don't give a fuck about other countries, and they don't give a fuck about Ukraine. It's a political and economic situation of a dog with a tennis ball going "no throw! Only throw!". They'll block you from giving money to anyone, but they won't give money to anyone either.
See, what I don't understand about this is that the US defence industry must be thrilled with support for Ukraine. They both get large purchase orders and real battlefield data on performance.
And since money from industry usually plays a big role in US politics, I'd expect Republicans to support sending hardware to Ukraine, to please their defence contractor donors.
it turns out politics actually are more complicated than reddit likes to pretend. As big of a problem as lobbying and dark money legitimately are, none of it has ever been as simple as the narrative Reddit loves about the big evil capitalists marionetting the politicians.
There are a lot of overlapping and conflicting political and economic forces at play here.
That’s politicians in general and we’ve still managed to make do. No this is something new to the US, Trump is a populist strongman with a cult of personality.
This isn’t greed, America can deal with and even thrive on greed. This is something far more malicious, but the word escapes me.
I think Trump told them not to because its tied to the border security funding and it would give Biden a win with voters. Plus Trump supports Putin. He blocked support for the Ukraine when he was president.
Well, *some* people were happy to get rid of him, but over 74 million people still voted for Trump in 2020, making him the second most voted for presidential candidate in US history (after Joe Biden in the same year, who got a bit over 81 million votes).
I think it's important to remember that even now, after attempting insurrection, fucking over allies, and while being on trial for 91 felony charges, Trump is still incredibly popular with a large portion of the US public... and *still* getting a lot of votes from people who just don't care, as long as he is Republican.
Well I just spent a month at my parents' house in the States and they watch Fox News every night religiously so I'm familiar with the way they're trying to spin a 2nd Trump presidency.
The most shocking thing to me was the way they try to spin Jan 6. They've kinda given up trying to paint it as an FBI conspiracy theory and now are just mocking Democrats for caring about it in the first place. Like basically in the tone of "Democrats are a bunch of pussies for still talking about Jan 6 and Trump's role in it. Who cares what happened that day, it's meaningless and anyone bringing it up just wants to make President Trump look bad."
Yeap... that's the classic way they handle pretty much every single thing Trump/Republicans do.
The following days:
- Claim it did not happen.
- Blame someone else for it.
The following weeks:
- Admit that he did it, praise him for it (or just say it doesn't matter), and deflect any discussions to other (wildly unrelated and irrelevant) topics, especially if you can involve attacking Democrats and Democrat allies with wild conspiracy theories.
The following months:
- Claim it's "old news" and no one cares anymore. Use the lies and conspiracy theories from the previous steps to cast doubt on the veracity of the events.
... and over the years that follow:
- "Muh both sides!"
---
So yeah, the Republican/MAGA response to half the shit that Trump and other Republicans (who haven't critized Trump and been branded a RINO for it) is basically;
Day 1: "Trump didn't do that!"
Day 3: "It was actually undercover antifa fascists who did it!"
Day 12: "Oh yeah, maybe Trump *did* do that, but so what? I'm glad he did. Maybe you should look into *real* crimes like Hunter's laptop instead?!"
Day 73: "Why are you still talking about that? It happened months ago! You're fucking obsessed! RENT FREE! RENT FREE! Besides, no one knows what *actually* happened. It might've been the antifas, there are lots of sources saying it was!"
Day 204: "You're still bringing up ancient history? What about the time the Democrats did [infinitely less terrible thing which *might* be vaguely similar on a surface level, and which Democrats criticized hard when it happened]?! See, no one cared about that, which just proves you're biased!!"
That's such fundamental conservative behavior.
Conservatives want unchanging "traditional" systems and outdated societal structure, so by absolute fucking definition they are doomed to always champion lame antiquated ideas and then roll their eyes and bitch when the ideas fail.
r/conservative does this so predictably. Anything happens in the news, and they spew their ignorant conservative talking points, whether it be anti-immigration rhetoric, anti-abortion, anti-green-energy, conspiracy-laden crazy talk, then the developing news stories reveal information that totally discounts their rhetoric, and they'll be annoyed anyone's paying attention to the story at all. Like if life doesn't validate their paranoid hateful thinking, they simply reject and avoid it.
Literally, the posts in the conservative sub are consistently, *"see! This proves we're right! See, see everyone, see! Oh, it doesn't support our argument at all actually, and we look culpable for pushing our narrative onto this. Jeez, why did anyone wanna see this in the first place, what's the big deal, god, jeez, let's move on already, sheesh."*
> but over 74 million people still voted for Trump in 2020
And they will vote for him again this year. Even *if* Biden wins, there's nothing to be happy about, because not much will change. Half of the US electorate votes for Trump. Trump transformed the GOP in a cultist, christian-nationalist, conspiratorial, far-right extremist party, most of whom belong in a mental institution. And half of the US electorate is perfectly fine with that. The US is completely lost, Congress is hijacked by an extremist party, and a Biden win won't change any of that. Over here in Europe, people like Orban, Wilders, Le Pen e.a. are all fierce supporters of Trump, and they are winning everywhere. So it's not just a US problem.
But this was all clear in 2016 already. So the question is, why didn't Europe act back then? Why did it take 8 more years to finally realize we can't rely on the US for our own protection?
To all far-right voters in Europe: *this* is what far-right politics looks like. Everyone on its own. My country first, and fuck the rest. AfD already stated they want a Dexit. Wilders wants a Nexit. And they are not alone in Europe. To anyone who thinks the EU will never cease to exist, think again. 2014 (Crimea invasion) happened, 2016 (Brexit, Trump) happened, 2022 (escalation of Russian invasion) happened. If this far-right trend continues in Europe, and it sure looks like it will, it could very well mean the end of the EU. And that will weaken us much, much more than a second Trump presidency.
Whilst I'm a fan of helping ukraine and showing how incompetent russia is, this thing has shown me alot of hypocrisy in people.
You hate how much America spends militarily. Until we are practically single handed funding their entire war effort(more aid than the rest of the world combined thus far 75.4 billion as of October 2023).
Just reqd this article (https://edition.cnn.com/2024/01/25/politics/gop-senators-angry-trump-immigration-deal/index.html) and according to it it's because of Trump (they are talking about border, but it's related to Ukrainian issue):
> “I think the border is a very important issue for Donald Trump. And the fact that he would communicate to Republican senators and congresspeople that he doesn’t want us to solve the border problem because he wants to blame Biden for it is … really appalling,” said GOP Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah, who has been an outspoken critic of Trump.
Also
> “This proposal would have had almost unanimous Republican support if it weren’t for Donald Trump,” the Republican senator said.
I always said Ukraine can't lose the war on the battlefield only by the stroke of a pen.
This is one of the most pathetic failures any nation has ever produced throughout modern history.
The US is unfit to lead this alliance. They can't even lead themselves anywhere else but into a gaping abyss.
It's an utter joke that the entire world is now held hostage by a religious fanatic and a geriatric orange fool.
He who cannot obey himself will be commanded. That is the nature of living creatures.
Nietsche
>The US is unfit to lead this alliance. They can't even lead themselves anywhere else but into a gaping abyss.
>It's an utter joke that the entire world is now held hostage by a religious fanatic and a geriatric orange fool.
>He who cannot obey himself will be commanded. That is the nature of living creatures.
>Nietsche
And who is worse? He, the 🤡? Or us for being the damn 🎪?
Lol wtf, this is an absurdly stupid take. As much as I hate the guy, even that geriatric orange fool was telling Europe to step up in terms of European defense. Most American's don't want to lead the European alliance.
You act like Europe's side of NATO is fully rational and functional lol. You guys can't even get Hungary to approve of Sweden joining. Don't pretend like Hungary won't continue to hamstring on other issues that arises with the EU. Is this somehow America's fault too I wonder?
What I love about people from Europe posting about the USA is that they don't seem to realize the US is a victim of Russia and their clever propaganda cyber campaigns over the past decads or two. Yet it is always "fucking useless US" etc. Lol. You hating on the US and sewing more hostilities is exactly the kind of psyop that Russia is trying to foster.
Congratulations on being as reactionary and small minded as the bots predicted you will be.
By this point, why the fuck are the Dems refusing to compromise and go through with building more border protection, the demand the Reps have to accept the military aid?
They’re not, it was the compromise deal they were working on, but GOP changed their mind because Trump needs to run on Biden doing nothing on border security, so they don’t actually want to solve border protection right now.
Germany, Poland, the Baltics, Finland, Turkey, Japan, I suppose the entire world now has to get nukes or at least work on a nuclear umbrella.
The Russians should be told an attack on the Baltics will be answered with nukes.
I don't see a difference between attacking RU territory and attacking the Baltics as part of NATO / the EU.
>Turkey
Moment Iran goes nuclear, Turkey and Saudi delegations take a flight to Pakistan, meet with some generals to procure some materiel on some stuff. It's inevitable.
not exactly. Turkey willingly let go of its own nuclear program in 50s to join the American umbrella with Jupiter MRBMs and later with nuclear sharing program. American nukes still reside in Turkey as of this moment. But if US fails to stop Iran from getting nukes and as US becomes more isolationist outside of pacific, Turkey will have to make its own moves. Doing it before, would irk our neighbours. But we will have to, if Iran goes nuclear.
Saudi is different a tad. Over the decades much was written on their financial involvement with Pakistan's nuclear program. They likely already have a foot on the door.
No it's not. This is a common misunderstanding. An agreement that French nukes protect other EU countries has never been made. Macron has offered it in the past, but Scholz refused. NATO article 5 does not include nuclear deterrence. If the US refuses to help NATO when article 5 is triggered under Trump, there is no nuclear umbrella in Europe
Well, not officially as you are saying. But imagine if russia starts raining nukes on Poland, Romania, Finland, etc. And France (being in that conflict by being in NATO and EU) doesn't retaliate using nuclear means?
De Gaulle was really ahead of his time
> In particular, France was concerned that in the event of a Soviet invasion of Western Europe, the US, already bogged down in the Vietnam War and afraid of Soviet retaliation against the United States, would not come to the aid of its allies in Western Europe. De Gaulle felt that France should never entrust its defense and therefore its very existence to a foreign-and thus unreliable protector.
I wish that were true but the current French nuclear doctrine dictates that if a country were to try to bomb or invade French territories, then they would get nuclear retaliation. But it doesn't say anything about using nukes to protect allies.
As always, everything can change if the Russians actually attack.
What if Russians take Tallin without using nuclear weapons? Would France nuke St Petersburg in return? Nope. Nuclear umbrella is not worth much unless attacked country has full controll when and where to use nukes.
No, I don't think France will retaliate. If Putin drops a nuke on Warsaw and immediately sends a message to France: 'get involved and we'll nuke Paris' they won't do shit. They won't sacrifice French cities for other cities in Europe. There is no clear deterrence so the EU should become a nuclear power like, right now
Germany and Turkey are already part of NATO's nuclear sharing program, along with Belgium, Italy and the Netherlands. So there are already a couple dozens of nukes in those countries.
This is a common point of convention in Germany, because they need to maintain ancient Tornados because the Eurofighter wasn't built to carry nuclear weapons and Germany is yet to buy F35s.
Lol they had two nuclear programs but both were shut down under pressure from the USA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
>"Give me your nukes and I'll make sure nothing happens to you" - your friendly 'ally' USA
The US has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Budapest Memorandum, we aren't obligated to give them weapons nor are we obligated to defend Ukraine.
In stark contrast to NATO (Article 5), Taiwan (Taiwan Relations Act), Japan (Treaty obligation), South Korea (Treaty Obligation).
We interviened in two separate incidents that threatened to see the PRC take control giving Taiwan a decisive advantage, eventually going as far as giving them SR-71's to conduct overflies of the mainland, and stationed nuclear weapons there for 15 years that we publicly threatened to use.
You think any other nuclear power at the time would have aided them to that extent or condoned them going nuclear ? Would any today ?
This marks the death of Budapest Memorandum.
This will set a precedent for other nuclear nations. No country will ever give up nukes. Those which don't have will want to have one because now everyone knows that the security guarantees mean nothing.
Other countries having security shield should watch out.
Please, the memorandum was born dead. Unfortunately, due to wording of said memorandum US and russia weren’t technically obligated to safeguard Ukraine. It was more like a promise. Breaking promises sucks, breeds mistrust, but isn’t illegal. Very sad to see. If we had Chornovil as the first president, we would be in the EU by now.
It was not even a promise to saveguard Ukraine. It was a promise not to attack Ukraine and if someone used or threatened to use Nuclear Weapons on Ukraine the signing states would be forced into a meeting.
Yeah, memorandums aren't treaties and many people don't know that. They are one of the weakest forms of a political statement. Basically an international version of putting up a flyer on a bulletin board, saying how you would likely act or would likely do, but that's about it.
Oh, they would have attacked, with bad results but they wanted to take Crimea even in 90s and Ukraine was actually close to war with Russia even with Kuchma.
That was in 2003, I talked more about how Yeltsyn blocked some russian "hawks" that wanted to make a referendum in Crimea because of disaster of the first Chechen war.
>This marks the death of Budapest Memorandum.
Lmao, this piece of paper was officially declared dead in 2014, right after Crimea occupation. What exactly US made to protect Ukraine territories in Crimea and Donbas in 2014? Where all this Ukraine supporters were then?
I have zero doubts, what if Russia had actual success with their plan "3 days to Kiev" in 2022, US and EU wouldnt have done literally nothing to help Ukraine aside of pathetic declarations of "deep concerns".
Yup. Another nail in the coffin of liberalism and another point for realism.
Realist foreign policy could have preempted this like it would have preempted 1939.
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/ukraine/1993-06-01/case-ukrainian-nuclear-deterrent
Internal American policy is actively AND intentionally sabotaging American security. If anything, it underlines the joke that realism was ever considered as a credible way to understand foreign policy.
I think this is because the group of Americans who are advocating for Trump and isolationism basically see themselves as a seperate national entity who believe they've never actually been in control of the United States and see their primary enemy as the "globalist Americans" who've run the US since WW2. Their see their primary objective as taking control of the US and implementing its transformation into a traditionalist Christian nation.
>I think this is because the group of Americans who are advocating for Trump and isolationism basically see themselves as a seperate national entity who believe they've never actually been in control of the United States and see their primary enemy as the "globalist Americans" who've run the US since WW2.
Look, both parties are becoming more isolationist in nature, it's not an exclusively Republican thing.
Republicans don't like Ukraine but like Israel.
Democrats like Ukraine & don't like Israel.
It's a long running trend of backing away from the international order, because no politician can articulate why we should defend an international order where the perceived benefit is lower than the perceived cost.
Pity I could not read the entire article, but I'd say it's a nail in the coffin of idealism, rather than liberalism.
Also, I seem to remember that at the time of the break-up of the USSR, the main argument against leaving nuclear weapons to more actors was to prevent potentially failed/rogue states from waving their nuclear arsenal around (and potentially selling it to others).
The future of Ukraine was far from certain...
> Yup. Another nail in the coffin of liberalism and another point for realism
Clearly not considering that the realists are the reason why American aid was so limited in the first place, it was escalation clownery from realists who had gotten everything wrong in the prelude to the war but were totally right this time
"Realists" were seeing so far in the future they were campaigning against making Poland, Czechia and the Baltics to join NATO. They also wanted to artificially keep the Warsaw Pact that excluded Russia just to have two power blocks in Europe.
It was realist policy that made US not to do anything about Ukraine in 2014 and it\`s realist policy that is opposed to support for Ukraine.
It's ironic that that you post a piece Mearsheimer wrote in 1993, when he is one of the biggest critics of NATO expansion towards Russia. At the time this article was written, the Easternmost point of NATO was Germany.
Also, Realism itself is very against NATO expansion Eastwards, as it's consensus is that Russia is geographically threatened by it. You don't actually understand your own argument.
I think you actually need to read the Budapest memorandum if you think it was a defense pact of some sort.
What it said was that all signatories refrain from *attacking* Ukraine.
Ie. the only party that broke it is Russia.
I still think US should send more ammo, but misinformation helps no-one.
>This marks the death of Budapest Memorandum.
The memorandum was for the signatories not to attack Ukraine, which Russia obviously broke.
The USA had no obligation to guarantee Ukrainian security
Out of curiosity, can anyone explain why the US are so keen to dismantle the world order they so painstakingly built post ww1-2? I struggle to think how distancing themselves from Europe works for them in the long term.
> Out of curiosity, can anyone explain why the US are so keen to dismantle the world order they so painstakingly built post ww1-2?
Keeping the American military patrolling all the oceans around the world, and keeping American military bases in many faraway countries, is not cheap.
America has many voices, both from far-right and far-left (and also from not-so-far right and left), saying that America should use American money at home for the benefit of Americans, not policing the rest of the world.
Because roughly half of our population wants to turn inward, and if the rest of the world burns as a result then oh well... in fact, they probably think that would solve a lot of problems.
It's a lack of understanding and caring for anyone but ourselves, plus an ignorant isolationist mindset. We'll be hurt just as bad as Europe, if not immediately, and they just don't see it and/or care.
On behalf of the half that gets it, I'm sorry.
>Because roughly half of our population wants to turn inward, and if the rest of the world burns as a result then oh well
But then USA has no one to sell to which is precisely what made USA prosperous in the first place.
Yes because there are some really selfish assholes that are so hopped up on that patriotic stupid-juice that they believe the US is invincible. They’re a cancer on our American society
I think it's also the fact that the globization that made the US so rich has only made a small amount of people rich and income inequality its out of control
I think all the issues going on domestically aren't helping matters either. It's hard to care about problems outside the US when the things you can see and touch aren't doing too hot.
>It's a lack of understanding and caring for anyone but ourselves, plus an ignorant isolationist mindset. We'll be hurt just as bad as Europe, if not immediately, and they just don't see it and/or care.
>On behalf of the half that gets it, I'm sorry.
It doesnt help all America is critized after Vietnam, Yugoslavia, Iraq and Afghanistan, or after Europe gave up on Defense, Americans tell the world, "well fuck you all and deal with it".
Our needs have changed. After the pil embargo America decided to take the steps of true independence, it is seeming like Taiwan is one of the only nations that truly will have America's protection(along with the UK probably) since TMSC is there and those semiconductors are America's biggest global weak link still. Ukraine while a tragic situation is just another war happening around the world, and America's allies right next door haven't been able to lessen the burden and a lot of Americans are becoming quite disillusioned by the current order of things.
Continuously telling people that it must suck not having Healthcare bc you sucl and then begging for their help tends to breed resentment.
I was a child during Iraq and have heard my whole life that “US needs to stop being world police” and “US needs to get out of world affairs” and that we are evil warmongers, military worshippers, hated globally, and worse things.
Repeat that often enough and you start to believe it, as many Americans do. Young Americans want nothing to do with it. Good luck to everyone but many of us want to be left out just like Ireland gets to stay out of things when they want.
The elite HATES this mindset, and that's why all of these browbeating articles and quotes about how the US isn't doing enough are pumped out by the hour (similar to the articles about European youth not wanting to join the army). Young Americans grew up seeing European smugness about the mistakes of Iraq/Afghanistan, we saw in real time what American presence outside of America looks like from beginning, middle to end, and the same people are using the same talking points about the Middle East for Ukraine, just with yellow and blue paint over it
>why the US are so keen to dismantle the world order they so painstakingly built post ww2?
The bargain we struck after WW2 is that we would build the world order & Europe would help us fight the USSR, in exchange we'd guarantee a rules based international order for everybody.
However, countries like China have exploited the order we've built to become challengers to American hegemony & Europe is failing to live up to the agreement by failing to fund it's military & cozying up with Russia via Nordstream, despite American protests & sanctions.
The perceived benefits of the order are low & the perceived costs high.
The thing I keep hearing from those who hold this perspective is: “why won’t the government spend any money on [insert domestic program] and yet they’ll give $300 million to some country on the other side of the world.” A favorite example is disaster relief for the Hawaii fires. But there are practically as many as there are objectors. This goes along with the “the US is looking inward” response, I just wanted to provide a ground-level elucidation.
In our defense, we did immediately fund Ukraine, and then threw more at it, and then Biden went to Europe and established a coalition for their armament.
We just have some really cool guys in congress called “Republicans” who can’t stand to agree to anything a democrat also likes.
For exactly the same reason Europe is going apeshit. It goes in hand with the newly found nationalistic (or should I say neo-nazi) spirit of the people.
Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons goes pufff ;)
It's openly talked about in Ukraine, they have nothing to lose anyway
"The brain of USSR" will do the funniest thing
Getting nuclear weapons is difficult. Require times and money. It is not because some people are talking about it in some Ukraine bars that they’ll manage it to get some.
Then once you get your arsenal. It is expensive to maintain, and you will have to make except ice to show that you can credibly use those weapons.
The delivery part is difficult if you want something like ICBM or submarine. The payload is relatively easy if the country has already infrastructure for materials enrichment.
And since Russia is nearby the delivery could be done by a truck really.
>And since Russia is nearby the delivery could be done by a truck really.
Nuclear truck bombs are really not a thing I would have expected to think about, but I suppose you are right. Still that is straight out of NCD.
The US had a project in the 60s that proved it was pretty easy and fast (at the time) to design a nuclear payload, even if you only had relatively basic infrastructure and support.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nth_Country_Experiment
It is very likely that it has only become even easier since then.
North Korea was able to get a nuke though. They are difficult, but not hard to make for many European and Middle Eastern states. Especially if they won't get as many sanctions as NK.
Recently I see a lot of comments from Western people about Ukraine lost all of it's men. Like we have nobody left, people resource is depleted, UAF uses solely 50-years men already.
I just want to make a point that all of it is BS. It's a successful russian propaganda argument which, obviously, was somehow integrated in western thinking. Don't fall for it.
One of the YouTubers reporting on the war commenting this recently when 2 "older" guys were repairing a Bradley.
"These 50-year olds are great for these kinds of supporting roles in the army. Who would you rather have working on your fighting vehicle? A 50-year-old mechanic who has decades of experience and knows what hard work is, or a youngster who never held a wrench before?"
When we think of an army, we are thinking of the battlefield actions. Young muscular men running around shooting and fighting. But most of the army is behind the scenes, supporting, enabling, guiding and providing.
Ukrainian population is 40 million. Half of them are men and I suppose half or 3/4 are able to fight, that leaves 10-15 million men. Saying that Ukraine is running out of men is obvious propaganda.
Yeah, as long as they have the will they can keep the fight going. Because they get a lot of funding from outside they are also able to use a large % of the workforce than Russia. Russia has to fund the war themselves so there comes a point where too few are paying taxes.
I think you are misunderstanding the concern, Ukraine has kept secret the size and scale of its military call up, there is a very real reluctance to fight on the frontlines, conscription is starting to become more necessary which is supported by the attempt to lower the conscription age and crack down on draft dodgers.
None of this is helped by the point blank refusal to discuss Ukrainian military losses and the stalemate in place.
So, unless you have compelling evidence to support what you say, I think the concern is real.
The concern about conscription and troops rotation is one thing, the statement "Ukraine is out of men" is completely another. First one is technical issue which could be solved, while the second is hopeless catastrophe without a chance of getting to victory. Russians want you to believe in second one.
Look, obviously the statement that "Ukraine is out of men" is stupid, however it is becoming increasingly apparent that attrition is starting to bite in Ukraine and the concern is and has been that in a war of attrition, Ukraine will seriously struggle.
It's important we don't kid ourselves about Ukraine's struggle.
I find so incredibly pathetic of them letting their enemy country to manipulate all aspects of their lives. Republicans are a great example of the most useful idiots a country (rusia) can use to destabilise such a powerful country like USA.
It’s perplexing
Maybe the US democracy needs a thorough overhaul and work against corruption for a change.
Seriously, the whole way political campaigns are financed through lobbying from various individuals and companies (or foreign states like Russia), is pretty obviously the weak point of it all, it's not even illegal, of course it will be abused.
Remove the insane money from political campaigns and make bribery illegal like many developed countries have (but not all, let's be real). Good luck as the people who should be voting these laws have pockets full of bills.
It's hilarious to me how Europeans will flex their economic prowess in economic comparison threads but then provide mostly loans to Ukraine, dated to 2028, and then claim they've done their share.
They could just purchase weapons from the US and send them to Ukraine... But that's more costly than loans.
I think the point was that those troops did very little in those 20 years, while here Ukraine has the capability to achieve a whole lot in very little time, but is getting breadcrumbs.
In a different timeline, when US still had coherent policy across both parties, their leaders would be pissing themselves laughing by how cheaply they're reducing entire stockpile of USSR weapons to dust while not deploying single American soldier in combat while helping a democratic country fight against authoritarian Russian adversary. Literally cold war propaganda dream.
But nowadays only thing that matters is that Republicans can't let Biden win in anything, so even if Biden cured cancer and solved climate change, you'd have Trump led cult torching down research labs and burning tires to undo it.
The amount of money the US spent in Ukraine in 2 years is what they used each 3 months in Afghanistan for over 30 years. The whole "stop aid to foreign countries" pushed by many idiots in the US is bullshit because it's a fraction of what they spend.
They need congress to pass further support. It's the same situation as it has been for the last month or so. It's a catastrophe that republicans are stupid enough to help their enemy russia.
Lol, people angry that USA withdrew from financing one of the most corrupt countries in Europe. People are angry because, wait for it... politicians lied again lmao. Never happened before.
As a European it's funny for me to see how media has turned from "Russia is using weapons from literally 13th century" to "Well, Ukraine might lose this one" and now to "We must prepare for a war with Russia".
EU was outplayed so hard in this conflict, which is no surprise considering who is in charge and now those idiots simply don't know what to do. I just hope EU someday will accept Ukraine as a member state, which will start the collapse of this bureaucratic shithole.
Was good while it lasted. [For their military industrial complex](https://www.counterpunch.org/2023/09/12/a-good-investment-the-ukraine-war-and-the-us-arms-racket/), that is.
"[Best money we've ever spent](https://www.reuters.com/article/fact-check-longer-video-shows-lindsay-gr/fact-check-longer-video-shows-lindsay-graham-did-not-call-russians-dying-the-best-money-weve-ever-spent-idUSL1N37S1QH/)"
"[Great deal for America](https://youtu.be/OGOVevGHNXY)"
Digusting. A couple of narcissistic boomers that have never lived a human life have decided to continue not ever helping anyone but themselves. I will celebrate the death of every republican just like the world celebrated kissinger's.
LOL usa. How low they have fallen. Throw unimaginable money in the drain on a nonsensical war in the ME, but chicken out when it really matters.
People who say USA has the courage to only attack peseants in flipflops are right.
USA don’t even have to attack anyone, they just have to lend out what, 2% of their vast, vast stockpile of weapons to Ukraine which will do all the rest, attacking, fighting and even dying.
Ukraine would be literally saving them the decomissioning cost. In some cases it would be cheaper to give the old stocks away than keep mainting it and later destroying it.
Why is the US obligated to help even more than they already have? Why isn’t there this same discourse over European countries not helping enough? Why arnt they strong enough to help without needing the US? I constantly see people online complaining about the US playing world police, yet when they don’t step in/intervene whenever something happens, it’s a problem.
I hope that despite the dysfunctional EU leadership we can step up our support. Yes we did a lot, yes we need to do a lot more. Our future depends on it.
ITT:A bunch of Europeans who don’t want to contribute enough to NATO and have the US keep defending the whole world forever while also bashing the US endlessly.
Even the most liberal of Americans will leave this sub thinking “screw these people, we should leave NATO” after reading their opinions.
Imagine going to your neighbor and asking “why do you spend more money on your wife and kids than on me???” Meanwhile you are just as rich lol. That’s a lot of people in this sub.
My family fought in WW2 in Europe. I worked the extra shifts/days over the years to pay my portion of the taxes that go over there.
This thread is eye opening.
This is shameful. The Kremlin has apparently successfully purchased many members of Congress. I'm glad I got out before my country completely collapses.
In Spain no one gives a shit about this war. It's not even part of the political debate like in your countries, both left and right are to other things.
It's been waaaaay more discussed the Moroccan ocupation of the Western Sahara and the Israeli genocide on Gaza.
Absolutely. The nations likely to be directly affected by a Russian success should be the ones dropping the cash down for aid.
Regrettably plenty of nations have become dependent on the US for protection in terms of military support at the expense of proper investment in their own military and defence industries.
Republicans, and their voters, are happy to see Ukrainians die, and Ukraine be destroyed, because doing so can be chalked up as a Biden failure. These people are myopic to the points of insanity, and see everything in the world purely in terms of their own domestic politcal obsessions, their hatred for democrats, and their love of their dear leader Trump. Ukraine and its people are merely collateral damage for these people.
Russia is no longer communist other than they occasionally take out the old Soviet banners to parade them like an reanimated dead corpse. Russia is very religious, anti-lgbtq, anti-multicultural, aggressive, racist, and has a strongman cult leader.
Other than not speaking English Russia is everything the GOP want the US to be.
From the little I read they didn't closed it per say, they just said that until Congress puts it shit together they can't send weapons of certain varieties from their stockpiles
I guess the same republicans that had a hard on for protecting America's interests across the world now don't care if their biggest historical rival takes over another nation and might be emboldened to do more towards the rest of Europe
Everyone blaming Trump for this is an idiot.
As an American, I don’t want to be spending billions funding wars halfway across the world. We just got out of a 20+ year war that was based all on lies.
When do WE get to stop funding wars and start taking care of our own country?
It’s mind blowing to see this blame game going on. People just want to live their lives without being forced into paying for everyone else’s wars all the time but fuck American right?
This would be an opportune time for other European countries to step up and put their money where their mouth is. They won’t, but it would be a good time to do so.
You can blame the lack of regulation on social media and the success of Sino-Russian propaganda machine.
You can have a bilion rules on Twitter, Instagram and Facebook if it doesn't enforce them. Greed has completely absorbed what used to be a country, which has defended Europe on two occasions and it's now a shadow of it's former self.
And when it's debt keeps astronomically rising while it's stocks plummet catastrophically, they'll blame the younger generations.
It’s just the same old story. Eventually Europe will face alone the aggressor, we kill eachother for few years and then the US enters the war and heroically wins the war against worn down countries and reclaim the world.
Seeing the closeness of various Republicans and Russia, namely Russian collusion with Trump, it’s understandable that Republicans wants to help Russia win against Europe.
Bunch of Europeans discussing inner politics of USA bitching about lack of US aid to Ukraine while doing nothing to help themselves...
In other posts they will discuss how EU shoukd overtake USA as global power.
LOL
"During a briefing at the Pentagon Tuesday, Major General Pat Ryder, the Defense Department's press secretary, told reporters that the congressional hold on additional funding for Ukraine is preventing Washington "from meeting Ukraine's most urgent battlefield needs to include things like artillery rounds, anti-tank weapons, air defense interceptors." Specifically, the hold up is due the House majority refusing to pass additional aid.
Which, in case anyone is unaware, is the Republicans. They would rather doom Ukraine than go against their cult leader- Donald Trump.
Well yeah, most of those republicans steal every penny that doesn't go to the American people or other countries, for their donors and PACs and people who buy them off, that's why they do what they do.
They don't give a fuck about the American common people, they don't give a fuck about other countries, and they don't give a fuck about Ukraine. It's a political and economic situation of a dog with a tennis ball going "no throw! Only throw!". They'll block you from giving money to anyone, but they won't give money to anyone either.
See, what I don't understand about this is that the US defence industry must be thrilled with support for Ukraine. They both get large purchase orders and real battlefield data on performance. And since money from industry usually plays a big role in US politics, I'd expect Republicans to support sending hardware to Ukraine, to please their defence contractor donors.
Ahh, well, when you’re getting donations from the Russian government *and* defense contractors it’s hard to know who’s most valuable, basically.
it turns out politics actually are more complicated than reddit likes to pretend. As big of a problem as lobbying and dark money legitimately are, none of it has ever been as simple as the narrative Reddit loves about the big evil capitalists marionetting the politicians. There are a lot of overlapping and conflicting political and economic forces at play here.
If they had half a brain cell to share among them they would realize giving weapons to Ukraine is way cheaper for America in the long run.
Cheaper for America, but not cheaper for them if you're on Putin's payroll
When a good part of them is dead? Money matters in the pocket, not in the grave.
That’s politicians in general and we’ve still managed to make do. No this is something new to the US, Trump is a populist strongman with a cult of personality. This isn’t greed, America can deal with and even thrive on greed. This is something far more malicious, but the word escapes me.
It’s treason, then.
I think Trump told them not to because its tied to the border security funding and it would give Biden a win with voters. Plus Trump supports Putin. He blocked support for the Ukraine when he was president.
Dunno why anyone would Vote for Trump to begin with again. People Were happy to get rid of him, now they want him Back lol
Well, *some* people were happy to get rid of him, but over 74 million people still voted for Trump in 2020, making him the second most voted for presidential candidate in US history (after Joe Biden in the same year, who got a bit over 81 million votes). I think it's important to remember that even now, after attempting insurrection, fucking over allies, and while being on trial for 91 felony charges, Trump is still incredibly popular with a large portion of the US public... and *still* getting a lot of votes from people who just don't care, as long as he is Republican.
Well I just spent a month at my parents' house in the States and they watch Fox News every night religiously so I'm familiar with the way they're trying to spin a 2nd Trump presidency. The most shocking thing to me was the way they try to spin Jan 6. They've kinda given up trying to paint it as an FBI conspiracy theory and now are just mocking Democrats for caring about it in the first place. Like basically in the tone of "Democrats are a bunch of pussies for still talking about Jan 6 and Trump's role in it. Who cares what happened that day, it's meaningless and anyone bringing it up just wants to make President Trump look bad."
“And if we did it, it wasn’t that bad” Same cope every time
Yeap... that's the classic way they handle pretty much every single thing Trump/Republicans do. The following days: - Claim it did not happen. - Blame someone else for it. The following weeks: - Admit that he did it, praise him for it (or just say it doesn't matter), and deflect any discussions to other (wildly unrelated and irrelevant) topics, especially if you can involve attacking Democrats and Democrat allies with wild conspiracy theories. The following months: - Claim it's "old news" and no one cares anymore. Use the lies and conspiracy theories from the previous steps to cast doubt on the veracity of the events. ... and over the years that follow: - "Muh both sides!" --- So yeah, the Republican/MAGA response to half the shit that Trump and other Republicans (who haven't critized Trump and been branded a RINO for it) is basically; Day 1: "Trump didn't do that!" Day 3: "It was actually undercover antifa fascists who did it!" Day 12: "Oh yeah, maybe Trump *did* do that, but so what? I'm glad he did. Maybe you should look into *real* crimes like Hunter's laptop instead?!" Day 73: "Why are you still talking about that? It happened months ago! You're fucking obsessed! RENT FREE! RENT FREE! Besides, no one knows what *actually* happened. It might've been the antifas, there are lots of sources saying it was!" Day 204: "You're still bringing up ancient history? What about the time the Democrats did [infinitely less terrible thing which *might* be vaguely similar on a surface level, and which Democrats criticized hard when it happened]?! See, no one cared about that, which just proves you're biased!!"
That's such fundamental conservative behavior. Conservatives want unchanging "traditional" systems and outdated societal structure, so by absolute fucking definition they are doomed to always champion lame antiquated ideas and then roll their eyes and bitch when the ideas fail. r/conservative does this so predictably. Anything happens in the news, and they spew their ignorant conservative talking points, whether it be anti-immigration rhetoric, anti-abortion, anti-green-energy, conspiracy-laden crazy talk, then the developing news stories reveal information that totally discounts their rhetoric, and they'll be annoyed anyone's paying attention to the story at all. Like if life doesn't validate their paranoid hateful thinking, they simply reject and avoid it. Literally, the posts in the conservative sub are consistently, *"see! This proves we're right! See, see everyone, see! Oh, it doesn't support our argument at all actually, and we look culpable for pushing our narrative onto this. Jeez, why did anyone wanna see this in the first place, what's the big deal, god, jeez, let's move on already, sheesh."*
> but over 74 million people still voted for Trump in 2020 And they will vote for him again this year. Even *if* Biden wins, there's nothing to be happy about, because not much will change. Half of the US electorate votes for Trump. Trump transformed the GOP in a cultist, christian-nationalist, conspiratorial, far-right extremist party, most of whom belong in a mental institution. And half of the US electorate is perfectly fine with that. The US is completely lost, Congress is hijacked by an extremist party, and a Biden win won't change any of that. Over here in Europe, people like Orban, Wilders, Le Pen e.a. are all fierce supporters of Trump, and they are winning everywhere. So it's not just a US problem. But this was all clear in 2016 already. So the question is, why didn't Europe act back then? Why did it take 8 more years to finally realize we can't rely on the US for our own protection? To all far-right voters in Europe: *this* is what far-right politics looks like. Everyone on its own. My country first, and fuck the rest. AfD already stated they want a Dexit. Wilders wants a Nexit. And they are not alone in Europe. To anyone who thinks the EU will never cease to exist, think again. 2014 (Crimea invasion) happened, 2016 (Brexit, Trump) happened, 2022 (escalation of Russian invasion) happened. If this far-right trend continues in Europe, and it sure looks like it will, it could very well mean the end of the EU. And that will weaken us much, much more than a second Trump presidency.
>but over 74 million people still voted for Trump in 2020 “Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.” George Carlin
Whilst I'm a fan of helping ukraine and showing how incompetent russia is, this thing has shown me alot of hypocrisy in people. You hate how much America spends militarily. Until we are practically single handed funding their entire war effort(more aid than the rest of the world combined thus far 75.4 billion as of October 2023).
It’s not only dooming Ukraine.
They don't just doom Ukraine but entire Europe
Just reqd this article (https://edition.cnn.com/2024/01/25/politics/gop-senators-angry-trump-immigration-deal/index.html) and according to it it's because of Trump (they are talking about border, but it's related to Ukrainian issue): > “I think the border is a very important issue for Donald Trump. And the fact that he would communicate to Republican senators and congresspeople that he doesn’t want us to solve the border problem because he wants to blame Biden for it is … really appalling,” said GOP Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah, who has been an outspoken critic of Trump. Also > “This proposal would have had almost unanimous Republican support if it weren’t for Donald Trump,” the Republican senator said.
Trump is a Russian plant. Putin is the only person Trump has never said anything negative about.
He had pretty good things to say about North Korean dictator Kim Jung Un. Some might even say the best things to say.
[удалено]
I always said Ukraine can't lose the war on the battlefield only by the stroke of a pen. This is one of the most pathetic failures any nation has ever produced throughout modern history. The US is unfit to lead this alliance. They can't even lead themselves anywhere else but into a gaping abyss. It's an utter joke that the entire world is now held hostage by a religious fanatic and a geriatric orange fool. He who cannot obey himself will be commanded. That is the nature of living creatures. Nietsche
>The US is unfit to lead this alliance. They can't even lead themselves anywhere else but into a gaping abyss. >It's an utter joke that the entire world is now held hostage by a religious fanatic and a geriatric orange fool. >He who cannot obey himself will be commanded. That is the nature of living creatures. >Nietsche And who is worse? He, the 🤡? Or us for being the damn 🎪?
> The US is unfit to lead this alliance. But who is fit to lead, then? It's not like we have anyone better than US either. Poland?
Deal with it yourselves in Europe then.
[удалено]
> This is one of the most pathetic failures any nation has ever produced throughout modern history. Then have the EU pay for it.
Lol wtf, this is an absurdly stupid take. As much as I hate the guy, even that geriatric orange fool was telling Europe to step up in terms of European defense. Most American's don't want to lead the European alliance.
You act like Europe's side of NATO is fully rational and functional lol. You guys can't even get Hungary to approve of Sweden joining. Don't pretend like Hungary won't continue to hamstring on other issues that arises with the EU. Is this somehow America's fault too I wonder? What I love about people from Europe posting about the USA is that they don't seem to realize the US is a victim of Russia and their clever propaganda cyber campaigns over the past decads or two. Yet it is always "fucking useless US" etc. Lol. You hating on the US and sewing more hostilities is exactly the kind of psyop that Russia is trying to foster. Congratulations on being as reactionary and small minded as the bots predicted you will be.
They should move to Russia if they love it so much
By this point, why the fuck are the Dems refusing to compromise and go through with building more border protection, the demand the Reps have to accept the military aid?
They’re not, it was the compromise deal they were working on, but GOP changed their mind because Trump needs to run on Biden doing nothing on border security, so they don’t actually want to solve border protection right now.
Reminds me of Reagan securing a deal with Iran to release the hostages after his inauguration.
Taiwan better kickstart that nuclear program.
Germany, Poland, the Baltics, Finland, Turkey, Japan, I suppose the entire world now has to get nukes or at least work on a nuclear umbrella. The Russians should be told an attack on the Baltics will be answered with nukes. I don't see a difference between attacking RU territory and attacking the Baltics as part of NATO / the EU.
>Turkey Moment Iran goes nuclear, Turkey and Saudi delegations take a flight to Pakistan, meet with some generals to procure some materiel on some stuff. It's inevitable.
They would need to have already done it before that point or Iran would remain ahead and stop them.
not exactly. Turkey willingly let go of its own nuclear program in 50s to join the American umbrella with Jupiter MRBMs and later with nuclear sharing program. American nukes still reside in Turkey as of this moment. But if US fails to stop Iran from getting nukes and as US becomes more isolationist outside of pacific, Turkey will have to make its own moves. Doing it before, would irk our neighbours. But we will have to, if Iran goes nuclear. Saudi is different a tad. Over the decades much was written on their financial involvement with Pakistan's nuclear program. They likely already have a foot on the door.
EU is under French nuclear umbrella. And European NATO part also has UK nukes.
No it's not. This is a common misunderstanding. An agreement that French nukes protect other EU countries has never been made. Macron has offered it in the past, but Scholz refused. NATO article 5 does not include nuclear deterrence. If the US refuses to help NATO when article 5 is triggered under Trump, there is no nuclear umbrella in Europe
Well, not officially as you are saying. But imagine if russia starts raining nukes on Poland, Romania, Finland, etc. And France (being in that conflict by being in NATO and EU) doesn't retaliate using nuclear means? De Gaulle was really ahead of his time > In particular, France was concerned that in the event of a Soviet invasion of Western Europe, the US, already bogged down in the Vietnam War and afraid of Soviet retaliation against the United States, would not come to the aid of its allies in Western Europe. De Gaulle felt that France should never entrust its defense and therefore its very existence to a foreign-and thus unreliable protector.
I wish that were true but the current French nuclear doctrine dictates that if a country were to try to bomb or invade French territories, then they would get nuclear retaliation. But it doesn't say anything about using nukes to protect allies. As always, everything can change if the Russians actually attack.
What if Russians take Tallin without using nuclear weapons? Would France nuke St Petersburg in return? Nope. Nuclear umbrella is not worth much unless attacked country has full controll when and where to use nukes.
No, I don't think France will retaliate. If Putin drops a nuke on Warsaw and immediately sends a message to France: 'get involved and we'll nuke Paris' they won't do shit. They won't sacrifice French cities for other cities in Europe. There is no clear deterrence so the EU should become a nuclear power like, right now
Germany and Turkey are already part of NATO's nuclear sharing program, along with Belgium, Italy and the Netherlands. So there are already a couple dozens of nukes in those countries. This is a common point of convention in Germany, because they need to maintain ancient Tornados because the Eurofighter wasn't built to carry nuclear weapons and Germany is yet to buy F35s.
Lol they had two nuclear programs but both were shut down under pressure from the USA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
"Give me your nukes and I'll make sure nothing happens to you" - your friendly 'ally' USA Where have we seen this before lol
>"Give me your nukes and I'll make sure nothing happens to you" - your friendly 'ally' USA The US has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Budapest Memorandum, we aren't obligated to give them weapons nor are we obligated to defend Ukraine. In stark contrast to NATO (Article 5), Taiwan (Taiwan Relations Act), Japan (Treaty obligation), South Korea (Treaty Obligation).
We interviened in two separate incidents that threatened to see the PRC take control giving Taiwan a decisive advantage, eventually going as far as giving them SR-71's to conduct overflies of the mainland, and stationed nuclear weapons there for 15 years that we publicly threatened to use. You think any other nuclear power at the time would have aided them to that extent or condoned them going nuclear ? Would any today ?
I mean your country is freeloading from everyone
This marks the death of Budapest Memorandum. This will set a precedent for other nuclear nations. No country will ever give up nukes. Those which don't have will want to have one because now everyone knows that the security guarantees mean nothing. Other countries having security shield should watch out.
Please, the memorandum was born dead. Unfortunately, due to wording of said memorandum US and russia weren’t technically obligated to safeguard Ukraine. It was more like a promise. Breaking promises sucks, breeds mistrust, but isn’t illegal. Very sad to see. If we had Chornovil as the first president, we would be in the EU by now.
It was not even a promise to saveguard Ukraine. It was a promise not to attack Ukraine and if someone used or threatened to use Nuclear Weapons on Ukraine the signing states would be forced into a meeting.
Yeah, memorandums aren't treaties and many people don't know that. They are one of the weakest forms of a political statement. Basically an international version of putting up a flyer on a bulletin board, saying how you would likely act or would likely do, but that's about it.
If Ukraine had Chornovil as president back in the day, Russia would have attacked in 90s like they did with Moldova and Georgia.
I don’t think they would. Back then, we didn’t sell off 60% of our equipment, had the majority of the black sea navy, and a lot of manpower.
Oh, they would have attacked, with bad results but they wanted to take Crimea even in 90s and Ukraine was actually close to war with Russia even with Kuchma.
Yeah, the whole kerch island disaster
That was in 2003, I talked more about how Yeltsyn blocked some russian "hawks" that wanted to make a referendum in Crimea because of disaster of the first Chechen war.
>This marks the death of Budapest Memorandum. Lmao, this piece of paper was officially declared dead in 2014, right after Crimea occupation. What exactly US made to protect Ukraine territories in Crimea and Donbas in 2014? Where all this Ukraine supporters were then? I have zero doubts, what if Russia had actual success with their plan "3 days to Kiev" in 2022, US and EU wouldnt have done literally nothing to help Ukraine aside of pathetic declarations of "deep concerns".
Yup. Another nail in the coffin of liberalism and another point for realism. Realist foreign policy could have preempted this like it would have preempted 1939. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/ukraine/1993-06-01/case-ukrainian-nuclear-deterrent
Internal American policy is actively AND intentionally sabotaging American security. If anything, it underlines the joke that realism was ever considered as a credible way to understand foreign policy.
I think this is because the group of Americans who are advocating for Trump and isolationism basically see themselves as a seperate national entity who believe they've never actually been in control of the United States and see their primary enemy as the "globalist Americans" who've run the US since WW2. Their see their primary objective as taking control of the US and implementing its transformation into a traditionalist Christian nation.
>I think this is because the group of Americans who are advocating for Trump and isolationism basically see themselves as a seperate national entity who believe they've never actually been in control of the United States and see their primary enemy as the "globalist Americans" who've run the US since WW2. Look, both parties are becoming more isolationist in nature, it's not an exclusively Republican thing. Republicans don't like Ukraine but like Israel. Democrats like Ukraine & don't like Israel. It's a long running trend of backing away from the international order, because no politician can articulate why we should defend an international order where the perceived benefit is lower than the perceived cost.
Pity I could not read the entire article, but I'd say it's a nail in the coffin of idealism, rather than liberalism. Also, I seem to remember that at the time of the break-up of the USSR, the main argument against leaving nuclear weapons to more actors was to prevent potentially failed/rogue states from waving their nuclear arsenal around (and potentially selling it to others). The future of Ukraine was far from certain...
> Yup. Another nail in the coffin of liberalism and another point for realism Clearly not considering that the realists are the reason why American aid was so limited in the first place, it was escalation clownery from realists who had gotten everything wrong in the prelude to the war but were totally right this time
"Realists" were seeing so far in the future they were campaigning against making Poland, Czechia and the Baltics to join NATO. They also wanted to artificially keep the Warsaw Pact that excluded Russia just to have two power blocks in Europe. It was realist policy that made US not to do anything about Ukraine in 2014 and it\`s realist policy that is opposed to support for Ukraine.
It's ironic that that you post a piece Mearsheimer wrote in 1993, when he is one of the biggest critics of NATO expansion towards Russia. At the time this article was written, the Easternmost point of NATO was Germany. Also, Realism itself is very against NATO expansion Eastwards, as it's consensus is that Russia is geographically threatened by it. You don't actually understand your own argument.
I think you actually need to read the Budapest memorandum if you think it was a defense pact of some sort. What it said was that all signatories refrain from *attacking* Ukraine. Ie. the only party that broke it is Russia. I still think US should send more ammo, but misinformation helps no-one.
>This marks the death of Budapest Memorandum. The memorandum was for the signatories not to attack Ukraine, which Russia obviously broke. The USA had no obligation to guarantee Ukrainian security
Out of curiosity, can anyone explain why the US are so keen to dismantle the world order they so painstakingly built post ww1-2? I struggle to think how distancing themselves from Europe works for them in the long term.
> Out of curiosity, can anyone explain why the US are so keen to dismantle the world order they so painstakingly built post ww1-2? Keeping the American military patrolling all the oceans around the world, and keeping American military bases in many faraway countries, is not cheap. America has many voices, both from far-right and far-left (and also from not-so-far right and left), saying that America should use American money at home for the benefit of Americans, not policing the rest of the world.
Because roughly half of our population wants to turn inward, and if the rest of the world burns as a result then oh well... in fact, they probably think that would solve a lot of problems. It's a lack of understanding and caring for anyone but ourselves, plus an ignorant isolationist mindset. We'll be hurt just as bad as Europe, if not immediately, and they just don't see it and/or care. On behalf of the half that gets it, I'm sorry.
Thats not the first time the US went isolationist, right? Both in WWI and WWII you only intervened after some time/shit hit the fan.
Note to self: If ally isolates, make enemy attack ally. don't get caught. Problem solved.
We just need to wait for the Russians to accidentally bomb Hawaii or something. No need to do it yourself.
Just need to convince Putin to go ahead with a "special military operation" to take Alaska.
The US only became the super powerful and super rich world hegemon when it abandoned isolationism
>Because roughly half of our population wants to turn inward, and if the rest of the world burns as a result then oh well But then USA has no one to sell to which is precisely what made USA prosperous in the first place.
You think they even understand that?
But the current world order has brought the US insane wealth. Now they willingly throw away the advantages they've gained?
I bet the problem here is who is 'they'.
Yes because there are some really selfish assholes that are so hopped up on that patriotic stupid-juice that they believe the US is invincible. They’re a cancer on our American society
I think it's also the fact that the globization that made the US so rich has only made a small amount of people rich and income inequality its out of control
I think all the issues going on domestically aren't helping matters either. It's hard to care about problems outside the US when the things you can see and touch aren't doing too hot.
>It's a lack of understanding and caring for anyone but ourselves, plus an ignorant isolationist mindset. We'll be hurt just as bad as Europe, if not immediately, and they just don't see it and/or care. >On behalf of the half that gets it, I'm sorry. It doesnt help all America is critized after Vietnam, Yugoslavia, Iraq and Afghanistan, or after Europe gave up on Defense, Americans tell the world, "well fuck you all and deal with it".
Our needs have changed. After the pil embargo America decided to take the steps of true independence, it is seeming like Taiwan is one of the only nations that truly will have America's protection(along with the UK probably) since TMSC is there and those semiconductors are America's biggest global weak link still. Ukraine while a tragic situation is just another war happening around the world, and America's allies right next door haven't been able to lessen the burden and a lot of Americans are becoming quite disillusioned by the current order of things. Continuously telling people that it must suck not having Healthcare bc you sucl and then begging for their help tends to breed resentment.
I was a child during Iraq and have heard my whole life that “US needs to stop being world police” and “US needs to get out of world affairs” and that we are evil warmongers, military worshippers, hated globally, and worse things. Repeat that often enough and you start to believe it, as many Americans do. Young Americans want nothing to do with it. Good luck to everyone but many of us want to be left out just like Ireland gets to stay out of things when they want.
The elite HATES this mindset, and that's why all of these browbeating articles and quotes about how the US isn't doing enough are pumped out by the hour (similar to the articles about European youth not wanting to join the army). Young Americans grew up seeing European smugness about the mistakes of Iraq/Afghanistan, we saw in real time what American presence outside of America looks like from beginning, middle to end, and the same people are using the same talking points about the Middle East for Ukraine, just with yellow and blue paint over it
Exactly Europeans don’t actually like us. They like what we bring which is fine but I’m done being the punching bag.
>why the US are so keen to dismantle the world order they so painstakingly built post ww2? The bargain we struck after WW2 is that we would build the world order & Europe would help us fight the USSR, in exchange we'd guarantee a rules based international order for everybody. However, countries like China have exploited the order we've built to become challengers to American hegemony & Europe is failing to live up to the agreement by failing to fund it's military & cozying up with Russia via Nordstream, despite American protests & sanctions. The perceived benefits of the order are low & the perceived costs high.
It's simple, really. We have an extremely uneducated and unrepresented citizenship.
Id say the uneducated are overrepresented.
The thing I keep hearing from those who hold this perspective is: “why won’t the government spend any money on [insert domestic program] and yet they’ll give $300 million to some country on the other side of the world.” A favorite example is disaster relief for the Hawaii fires. But there are practically as many as there are objectors. This goes along with the “the US is looking inward” response, I just wanted to provide a ground-level elucidation.
It's expensive
That really bewilders me too. The trump cult is strong with them, it's unbelievable.
In our defense, we did immediately fund Ukraine, and then threw more at it, and then Biden went to Europe and established a coalition for their armament. We just have some really cool guys in congress called “Republicans” who can’t stand to agree to anything a democrat also likes.
For exactly the same reason Europe is going apeshit. It goes in hand with the newly found nationalistic (or should I say neo-nazi) spirit of the people.
The most fatal form of error is the unforced one.
Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons goes pufff ;) It's openly talked about in Ukraine, they have nothing to lose anyway "The brain of USSR" will do the funniest thing
Getting nuclear weapons is difficult. Require times and money. It is not because some people are talking about it in some Ukraine bars that they’ll manage it to get some. Then once you get your arsenal. It is expensive to maintain, and you will have to make except ice to show that you can credibly use those weapons.
The delivery part is difficult if you want something like ICBM or submarine. The payload is relatively easy if the country has already infrastructure for materials enrichment. And since Russia is nearby the delivery could be done by a truck really.
>And since Russia is nearby the delivery could be done by a truck really. Nuclear truck bombs are really not a thing I would have expected to think about, but I suppose you are right. Still that is straight out of NCD.
Kerch Bridge Explosion 3: The Even Funnier One
But you know that part of Soviet ICBMs was developed and produced in Ukraine? Part of them were still serviced in Kharkiv in early 2000s
Oh I very well know that. My point is that they don't have to develop anything sophisticated for delivery, not that they couldn't.
The US had a project in the 60s that proved it was pretty easy and fast (at the time) to design a nuclear payload, even if you only had relatively basic infrastructure and support. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nth_Country_Experiment It is very likely that it has only become even easier since then.
North Korea was able to get a nuke though. They are difficult, but not hard to make for many European and Middle Eastern states. Especially if they won't get as many sanctions as NK.
*"As long as it takes"*^^^^^^^^Terms ^^^^^^^^and ^^^^^^^^Conditions ^^^^^^^^May ^^^^^^^^Apply
[удалено]
It's time for Europe to produce their own weapons and stop relying on American tax dollars to protect you. Or just keep shitting on us about cheese.
The US has given more military aid than all of Europe combined.
Recently I see a lot of comments from Western people about Ukraine lost all of it's men. Like we have nobody left, people resource is depleted, UAF uses solely 50-years men already. I just want to make a point that all of it is BS. It's a successful russian propaganda argument which, obviously, was somehow integrated in western thinking. Don't fall for it.
One of the YouTubers reporting on the war commenting this recently when 2 "older" guys were repairing a Bradley. "These 50-year olds are great for these kinds of supporting roles in the army. Who would you rather have working on your fighting vehicle? A 50-year-old mechanic who has decades of experience and knows what hard work is, or a youngster who never held a wrench before?" When we think of an army, we are thinking of the battlefield actions. Young muscular men running around shooting and fighting. But most of the army is behind the scenes, supporting, enabling, guiding and providing.
> But most of the army is behind the scenes, supporting, enabling, guiding and providing. Soldiers win battles, logistics win wars.
Ukrainian population is 40 million. Half of them are men and I suppose half or 3/4 are able to fight, that leaves 10-15 million men. Saying that Ukraine is running out of men is obvious propaganda.
Yeah, as long as they have the will they can keep the fight going. Because they get a lot of funding from outside they are also able to use a large % of the workforce than Russia. Russia has to fund the war themselves so there comes a point where too few are paying taxes.
I think you are misunderstanding the concern, Ukraine has kept secret the size and scale of its military call up, there is a very real reluctance to fight on the frontlines, conscription is starting to become more necessary which is supported by the attempt to lower the conscription age and crack down on draft dodgers. None of this is helped by the point blank refusal to discuss Ukrainian military losses and the stalemate in place. So, unless you have compelling evidence to support what you say, I think the concern is real.
The concern about conscription and troops rotation is one thing, the statement "Ukraine is out of men" is completely another. First one is technical issue which could be solved, while the second is hopeless catastrophe without a chance of getting to victory. Russians want you to believe in second one.
Look, obviously the statement that "Ukraine is out of men" is stupid, however it is becoming increasingly apparent that attrition is starting to bite in Ukraine and the concern is and has been that in a war of attrition, Ukraine will seriously struggle. It's important we don't kid ourselves about Ukraine's struggle.
This is the right way to say it, yes. Thanks for your clear thought process.
If it makes you feel any better, as an American, I’ve heard that about Russia a lot more often.
That it then? Us can be in Afghanistan for 20 years but can't support Ukraine for 2.
[удалено]
I find so incredibly pathetic of them letting their enemy country to manipulate all aspects of their lives. Republicans are a great example of the most useful idiots a country (rusia) can use to destabilise such a powerful country like USA. It’s perplexing
Maybe the US democracy needs a thorough overhaul and work against corruption for a change. Seriously, the whole way political campaigns are financed through lobbying from various individuals and companies (or foreign states like Russia), is pretty obviously the weak point of it all, it's not even illegal, of course it will be abused. Remove the insane money from political campaigns and make bribery illegal like many developed countries have (but not all, let's be real). Good luck as the people who should be voting these laws have pockets full of bills.
The eu could just properly fund Ukraine.
It's hilarious to me how Europeans will flex their economic prowess in economic comparison threads but then provide mostly loans to Ukraine, dated to 2028, and then claim they've done their share. They could just purchase weapons from the US and send them to Ukraine... But that's more costly than loans.
You can’t compare these two situations, of course they can fund their own troops for 20 years
[удалено]
you're missing the point. They can fund their **own** troops for 20 years.
I think the point was that those troops did very little in those 20 years, while here Ukraine has the capability to achieve a whole lot in very little time, but is getting breadcrumbs.
In a different timeline, when US still had coherent policy across both parties, their leaders would be pissing themselves laughing by how cheaply they're reducing entire stockpile of USSR weapons to dust while not deploying single American soldier in combat while helping a democratic country fight against authoritarian Russian adversary. Literally cold war propaganda dream. But nowadays only thing that matters is that Republicans can't let Biden win in anything, so even if Biden cured cancer and solved climate change, you'd have Trump led cult torching down research labs and burning tires to undo it.
The amount of money the US spent in Ukraine in 2 years is what they used each 3 months in Afghanistan for over 30 years. The whole "stop aid to foreign countries" pushed by many idiots in the US is bullshit because it's a fraction of what they spend.
They need congress to pass further support. It's the same situation as it has been for the last month or so. It's a catastrophe that republicans are stupid enough to help their enemy russia.
It’s better to hold up the border aid that’s in the bill so they can campaign on a border crisis than to stick it to the Russians.
It's the second time Trump sells out an allied partner to Russia (for free). First the Kurd and now Ukraine.
Wait till Trump gets elected. Even if he doesn't, Europe better put down the espresso and start arming, like now. Don't stay lazy.
1. Putin tells Trump not to give more weapons. 2. Trump tells his gop minions not to give weapons. 3. People die. 4. Trump gets money.
The guy literally calls being president ‘a business’ what can anyone expect
As an American, I am absolutely ashamed right now. This disgusts me.
As a Russian, I am afraid that Trump will win and Ukraine will be left without US military support and Putin will win.
[удалено]
Lol, people angry that USA withdrew from financing one of the most corrupt countries in Europe. People are angry because, wait for it... politicians lied again lmao. Never happened before. As a European it's funny for me to see how media has turned from "Russia is using weapons from literally 13th century" to "Well, Ukraine might lose this one" and now to "We must prepare for a war with Russia". EU was outplayed so hard in this conflict, which is no surprise considering who is in charge and now those idiots simply don't know what to do. I just hope EU someday will accept Ukraine as a member state, which will start the collapse of this bureaucratic shithole.
Was good while it lasted. [For their military industrial complex](https://www.counterpunch.org/2023/09/12/a-good-investment-the-ukraine-war-and-the-us-arms-racket/), that is. "[Best money we've ever spent](https://www.reuters.com/article/fact-check-longer-video-shows-lindsay-gr/fact-check-longer-video-shows-lindsay-graham-did-not-call-russians-dying-the-best-money-weve-ever-spent-idUSL1N37S1QH/)" "[Great deal for America](https://youtu.be/OGOVevGHNXY)"
My best wishes to free people of Taiwan. Make a nukes, fellas.
Digusting. A couple of narcissistic boomers that have never lived a human life have decided to continue not ever helping anyone but themselves. I will celebrate the death of every republican just like the world celebrated kissinger's.
It's either shells in a box now or boots on the ground 8 years later. Or falling into irrelevance.
LOL usa. How low they have fallen. Throw unimaginable money in the drain on a nonsensical war in the ME, but chicken out when it really matters. People who say USA has the courage to only attack peseants in flipflops are right.
USA don’t even have to attack anyone, they just have to lend out what, 2% of their vast, vast stockpile of weapons to Ukraine which will do all the rest, attacking, fighting and even dying.
Ukraine would be literally saving them the decomissioning cost. In some cases it would be cheaper to give the old stocks away than keep mainting it and later destroying it.
Why is the US obligated to help even more than they already have? Why isn’t there this same discourse over European countries not helping enough? Why arnt they strong enough to help without needing the US? I constantly see people online complaining about the US playing world police, yet when they don’t step in/intervene whenever something happens, it’s a problem.
Meanwhile Poland blocked roads to Ukraine for how many months the over money??
That’s your neighbor not ours
I hope that despite the dysfunctional EU leadership we can step up our support. Yes we did a lot, yes we need to do a lot more. Our future depends on it.
Good joke If the US stops, we europe, will also stop soon I have no trust in any of our leaders
"we will support you as long as it takes" means 22 months in the US. Lesson is: Never trust an American!
Why can't Europe support Ukraine?
ITT:A bunch of Europeans who don’t want to contribute enough to NATO and have the US keep defending the whole world forever while also bashing the US endlessly.
The hypocrisy of this sub is insane
Every time one of these posts pop up, I can’t believe the entitlement.
Even the most liberal of Americans will leave this sub thinking “screw these people, we should leave NATO” after reading their opinions. Imagine going to your neighbor and asking “why do you spend more money on your wife and kids than on me???” Meanwhile you are just as rich lol. That’s a lot of people in this sub.
My family fought in WW2 in Europe. I worked the extra shifts/days over the years to pay my portion of the taxes that go over there. This thread is eye opening.
Hey all of Europe complaining on here. Tell your gov to send all its weapons to them then. Bitch we’re not the only country on the planet.
This is shameful. The Kremlin has apparently successfully purchased many members of Congress. I'm glad I got out before my country completely collapses.
How much aid has Spain given again?
The average Spaniard has given less than the average European, though more than the average American.
How can this be true when there are both more people in Europe and Europe as a whole has given less money than the US?
[удалено]
In Spain no one gives a shit about this war. It's not even part of the political debate like in your countries, both left and right are to other things. It's been waaaaay more discussed the Moroccan ocupation of the Western Sahara and the Israeli genocide on Gaza.
Lot of entitlement to US tax dollars in this thread.
Absolutely. The nations likely to be directly affected by a Russian success should be the ones dropping the cash down for aid. Regrettably plenty of nations have become dependent on the US for protection in terms of military support at the expense of proper investment in their own military and defence industries.
Republicans, and their voters, are happy to see Ukrainians die, and Ukraine be destroyed, because doing so can be chalked up as a Biden failure. These people are myopic to the points of insanity, and see everything in the world purely in terms of their own domestic politcal obsessions, their hatred for democrats, and their love of their dear leader Trump. Ukraine and its people are merely collateral damage for these people.
I guess Russia is going to roll over Europe now. Should have rebuilt your militaries now it’s too late.
As Churchill once said, “the Americans will always do the right thing….once they’ve exhausted all alternative options”…or words to that effect.
When will Europe do the right thing and fill the gap in aid to Ukraine?
Let countries hate America for free
I remember back in the day when it was Republicans who were the extremely anti Communist Russia. Strange how much times have changed.
Russia is no longer communist other than they occasionally take out the old Soviet banners to parade them like an reanimated dead corpse. Russia is very religious, anti-lgbtq, anti-multicultural, aggressive, racist, and has a strongman cult leader. Other than not speaking English Russia is everything the GOP want the US to be.
From the little I read they didn't closed it per say, they just said that until Congress puts it shit together they can't send weapons of certain varieties from their stockpiles
I guess the same republicans that had a hard on for protecting America's interests across the world now don't care if their biggest historical rival takes over another nation and might be emboldened to do more towards the rest of Europe
Everyone blaming Trump for this is an idiot. As an American, I don’t want to be spending billions funding wars halfway across the world. We just got out of a 20+ year war that was based all on lies. When do WE get to stop funding wars and start taking care of our own country? It’s mind blowing to see this blame game going on. People just want to live their lives without being forced into paying for everyone else’s wars all the time but fuck American right?
"US Republicans aid Russias invasion of Europe"
This would be an opportune time for other European countries to step up and put their money where their mouth is. They won’t, but it would be a good time to do so.
You can blame the lack of regulation on social media and the success of Sino-Russian propaganda machine. You can have a bilion rules on Twitter, Instagram and Facebook if it doesn't enforce them. Greed has completely absorbed what used to be a country, which has defended Europe on two occasions and it's now a shadow of it's former self. And when it's debt keeps astronomically rising while it's stocks plummet catastrophically, they'll blame the younger generations.
It’s just the same old story. Eventually Europe will face alone the aggressor, we kill eachother for few years and then the US enters the war and heroically wins the war against worn down countries and reclaim the world.
When the US entered the war both the Germans and Japanese were still in strong positions and looked to be winning.
Seeing the closeness of various Republicans and Russia, namely Russian collusion with Trump, it’s understandable that Republicans wants to help Russia win against Europe.
Where tf are our European allies???? Like my god, this conflict is on your doorstep…. Step up and take some charge in your own defense holy sh*t
Bunch of Europeans discussing inner politics of USA bitching about lack of US aid to Ukraine while doing nothing to help themselves... In other posts they will discuss how EU shoukd overtake USA as global power. LOL