How should west respond to potential (likely) Russian invasion of Ukraine?

[ZiprHead]

 

[Jayjay]

The Democratic-led House of Representatives voted 368-57 on Tuesday evening to pass a roughly $40 billion bill to deliver aid to Ukraine as it continues to face Russia's brutal assault. All 57 votes in opposition were from Republicans.
The measure will next need to be passed by the Senate before it can go to President Joe Biden to be signed into law. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said earlier in the day on Tuesday that after the House approved the package, the Senate "will move swiftly" to get the measure passed and sent to Biden's desk.

CNN

The “aid” is primarily weapons. Our tax dollars at work. WTF ?

Dude: where do you get the news!?

CNN, it's right there in the link, Dude.

Of course. The Russians are bombing Ukranian cities and ports. The Ukrainians don't like that. So, they are trying to push the Russian artillery and navy away from Ukranian cities as possible. Asking Russians to stop isn't working. So we're sending military weapons to Ukraine to help push out Russian invaders. Push them back, stop the war, everyone wins!

"Everyone wins"? I'm not quite seeing how giving billions of $ to a war/regional conflict is a win for the citizens of the USA.

Seriously, we're going to be in the weapons business for a long time due to Russia.

A business is usually a for profit endeavor. Is the US taxpayer going to see more money, i.e. profit in return? Seems the only people making a profit would be the arms makers. Is this the business you are talking about?

We need to send tons of defensive weapons to the border countries (Finland, Sweden, Poland, Lithuania, and etc. We need to encourage Russia to keep their troops at home.

Doesn't seem to have worked. What's so special about Ukraine for the USA to get this involved?

Those are reasonable arguments. The US tax payers are not immediately affected even if Russia is allowed to fuck with its neighbors and grab more land. Those trillions of aid could be used to provide services, or tax cuts, to American citizens.

But I'd think that morally, it'd be nicer if 44 million people in Ukraine weren't thrown under the bus just because there isn't immediate profit to be made.

 

[TSwizzle]

On the other hand, not supporting Ukraine would get us what in Eastern Europe?

Why do "we" (US tax payers) need to get anything in Eastern Europe? Why is meddling in Eastern Europe a good thing but meddling in the Middle East frowned upon? After 20 years in Afghanistan and less than a year after getting out the USA has found something else to throw gobs of US citizens' tax money at.

 

[SLD]

The Democratic-led House of Representatives voted 368-57 on Tuesday evening to pass a roughly $40 billion bill to deliver aid to Ukraine as it continues to face Russia's brutal assault. All 57 votes in opposition were from Republicans.
The measure will next need to be passed by the Senate before it can go to President Joe Biden to be signed into law. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said earlier in the day on Tuesday that after the House approved the package, the Senate "will move swiftly" to get the measure passed and sent to Biden's desk.

CNN

The “aid” is primarily weapons. Our tax dollars at work. WTF ?

Dude: where do you get the news!?

CNN, it's right there in the link, Dude.

Of course. The Russians are bombing Ukranian cities and ports. The Ukrainians don't like that. So, they are trying to push the Russian artillery and navy away from Ukranian cities as possible. Asking Russians to stop isn't working. So we're sending military weapons to Ukraine to help push out Russian invaders. Push them back, stop the war, everyone wins!

"Everyone wins"? I'm not quite seeing how giving billions of $ to a war/regional conflict is a win for the citizens of the USA.

Seriously, we're going to be in the weapons business for a long time due to Russia.

A business is usually a for profit endeavor. Is the US taxpayer going to see more money, i.e. profit in return? Seems the only people making a profit would be the arms makers. Is this the business you are talking about?

We need to send tons of defensive weapons to the border countries (Finland, Sweden, Poland, Lithuania, and etc. We need to encourage Russia to keep their troops at home.

Doesn't seem to have worked. What's so special about Ukraine for the USA to get this involved?

Those are reasonable arguments. The US tax payers are not immediately affected even if Russia is allowed to fuck with its neighbors and grab more land. Those trillions of aid could be used to provide services, or tax cuts, to American citizens.

But I'd think that morally, it'd be nicer if 44 million people in Ukraine weren't thrown under the bus just because there isn't immediate profit to be made.

Furthermore it’s important for our Allies as well. If we didn’t try to stop Putin in Ukraine he could have decided we wouldn’t in Estonia. Then we could just abandon all of Europe to Russia as well. Last time someone tried to do that we got sucked into it at a much later stage and had to fight our way across North Africa, Italy and northwest Europe.

 

[Harry Bosch]

The Democratic-led House of Representatives voted 368-57 on Tuesday evening to pass a roughly $40 billion bill to deliver aid to Ukraine as it continues to face Russia's brutal assault. All 57 votes in opposition were from Republicans.
The measure will next need to be passed by the Senate before it can go to President Joe Biden to be signed into law. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said earlier in the day on Tuesday that after the House approved the package, the Senate "will move swiftly" to get the measure passed and sent to Biden's desk.

CNN

The “aid” is primarily weapons. Our tax dollars at work. WTF ?

Dude: where do you get the news!?

CNN, it's right there in the link, Dude.

Of course. The Russians are bombing Ukranian cities and ports. The Ukrainians don't like that. So, they are trying to push the Russian artillery and navy away from Ukranian cities as possible. Asking Russians to stop isn't working. So we're sending military weapons to Ukraine to help push out Russian invaders. Push them back, stop the war, everyone wins!

"Everyone wins"? I'm not quite seeing how giving billions of $ to a war/regional conflict is a win for the citizens of the USA.

Seriously, we're going to be in the weapons business for a long time due to Russia.

A business is usually a for profit endeavor. Is the US taxpayer going to see more money, i.e. profit in return? Seems the only people making a profit would be the arms makers. Is this the business you are talking about?

We need to send tons of defensive weapons to the border countries (Finland, Sweden, Poland, Lithuania, and etc. We need to encourage Russia to keep their troops at home.

Doesn't seem to have worked. What's so special about Ukraine for the USA to get this involved?

Very good point. You’re right. Actions in Ukraine will only affect Americans who consume food; use gas and oil; or who are impacted by inflation. No effect for anyone else.

 

[TSwizzle]

Gibberish.

 

[ZiprHead]

Gibberish.

And yet you keep posting it.

 

[ZiprHead]

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Gibberish.

And yet you keep posting it.

This is ultimately a war between fascists and democracy, between the terror that is russian ganster-state rule and freedom. Some people will never get that because their rational faculties have been emotionally short-circuited. The Russian Hitler just kills those who disagree with him whether he poisons them and their children or has them hacked to death or hanged. It's mob violence and intimidation, terrorism at it's most basic. Don't just kill them, kill their families and reduce their lives to rubble. Send a message to those who might also disagree that you will be ruthlessly murdered.

It's unfortunate at best that those living under an umbrella of freedom are unable to appreciate this reality. Kids shit their pants and the adults have to clean up the mess. Some things never change. It's okay. We can only hope that the kids will grow up with a sense of appreciation. That doesn't always happen, however, unfortunately.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The Democratic-led House of Representatives voted 368-57 on Tuesday evening to pass a roughly $40 billion bill to deliver aid to Ukraine as it continues to face Russia's brutal assault. All 57 votes in opposition were from Republicans.
The measure will next need to be passed by the Senate before it can go to President Joe Biden to be signed into law. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said earlier in the day on Tuesday that after the House approved the package, the Senate "will move swiftly" to get the measure passed and sent to Biden's desk.

CNN

The “aid” is primarily weapons. Our tax dollars at work. WTF ?

Better to smash the Russian army without taking the damage that would result from war and better to smash it in a way that isn't likely to go WWIII. The Ukrainian conflict is actually very good for us.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The “aid” is primarily weapons. Our tax dollars at work. WTF ?

I know. It beggars belief that the USA might spend money on weapons. Whatever next?

Those charts are not a meaningful comparison.

1) A lot of Chinese military spending doesn't show up on the books.

2) True military budgets are both dollars and lives. We are seeing that in Ukraine--Russia doesn't have much of the fancy stuff and so their troops are getting slaughtered.

 

[bilby]

On the other hand, not supporting Ukraine would get us what in Eastern Europe?

Why do "we" (US tax payers) need to get anything in Eastern Europe? Why is meddling in Eastern Europe a good thing but meddling in the Middle East frowned upon? After 20 years in Afghanistan and less than a year after getting out the USA has found something else to throw gobs of US citizens' tax money at.

The US benefits from 'meddling' in both regions by getting cheap fuel out of it, without being beholden to suppliers who actively and openly despise the USA.

The reason gas prices are high is because Putin invaded Ukraine.

You have made it very clear that you expect the US President (and, even more bizarrely, the Governor of California) to do something about that.

This is the US Government doing something - they are not only putting physical obstacles in the way of the invasion that caused that gas-price hike; They are also sending a clear message to anyone else who might be thinking of starting a war that raises Californian gas prices, that doing so will get you smacked back by US weapons systems.

In short, this is the grownups doing exactly what the infants who have been bawling about high gas prices demanded that they do. That those infants are too simplistic to understand that that's what they wanted is as unsurprising as it is pathetic.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

On the other hand, not supporting Ukraine would get us what in Eastern Europe?

Why do "we" (US tax payers) need to get anything in Eastern Europe? Why is meddling in Eastern Europe a good thing but meddling in the Middle East frowned upon? After 20 years in Afghanistan and less than a year after getting out the USA has found something else to throw gobs of US citizens' tax money at.

The Middle East is basically a mix of bad guys--fundamentally, most conflict there is Sunni/Shia. Ukraine is clearly the good guy here, except you're listening to Moscow-friendly sources.

 

[bilby]

Those charts are not a meaningful comparison.

They show that the US spends shitloads of money on weapons, both before and after the bill under discussion.

Which is all they were intended to do.

I apologise if you thought I was making a completely different point that I didn't mention in any way.

 

[Tigers!]

Saw this last night. Hilarious.
Sir David Attenborough (not really) narrated the end of Russian tanks in Ukraine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLFbwH_SgJk

 

[TV and credit cards]

On the other hand, not supporting Ukraine would get us what in Eastern Europe?

Why do "we" (US tax payers) need to get anything in Eastern Europe? Why is meddling in Eastern Europe a good thing but meddling in the Middle East frowned upon? After 20 years in Afghanistan and less than a year after getting out the USA has found something else to throw gobs of US citizens' tax money at.

We don't "need" to get anything. We will get

A reconstituted Soviet Union by time Trump runs for office again in 2024? Halfhearted sanctions knowing the US was not going to throw in with Ukraine. And a Russia with all of Ukraine’s economic output at its disposal.

if we don't help.

Is it not enough we have to spend billions on military security against China. You want to let Putin strengthen Russia's military on the backs of the Eastern European nations he absorbs?
Or is it your assumption if we let our military wither, China and Russia would not bully the rest of the world?

 

[steve_bank]

I have been watching a series on the history Rome.

Putin fits the mold of Roman leaders. To gain fame prosecute what you think is an easy war. The 'barberians' provided a convenient foil for centuries. If it goes badly send more troops to fight in endless conflict. Not unlike our endless conflict to get those pesky terrorists.

Roman leaders could never accept failure, it would be their end. Same for the generals.

Putin can never back down and will probably accept catastrophic failure and death before yielding.

 

[TSwizzle]

On the other hand, not supporting Ukraine would get us what in Eastern Europe?

Why do "we" (US tax payers) need to get anything in Eastern Europe? Why is meddling in Eastern Europe a good thing but meddling in the Middle East frowned upon? After 20 years in Afghanistan and less than a year after getting out the USA has found something else to throw gobs of US citizens' tax money at.

We don't "need" to get anything. We will get

A reconstituted Soviet Union by time Trump runs for office again in 2024? Halfhearted sanctions knowing the US was not going to throw in with Ukraine. And a Russia with all of Ukraine’s economic output at its disposal.

if we don't help.

Is it not enough we have to spend billions on military security against China. You want to let Putin strengthen Russia's military on the backs of the Eastern European nations he absorbs?
Or is it your assumption if we let our military wither, China and Russia would not bully the rest of the world?

I guess the USA never tires of getting involved in regional conflicts and lobbing gobs of tax payer $ at it. I really don't see what benefit to the US citizen there is in getting involved in yet another foreign adventure. For all intents and purposes the USA has been dragged into another proxy war with Russia in Ukraine similar to Afghanistan and Syria. And weirdly, a lot of people are getting a proper hard on for it.

 

[Elixir]

On the other hand, not supporting Ukraine would get us what in Eastern Europe?

Why do "we" (US tax payers) need to get anything in Eastern Europe? Why is meddling in Eastern Europe a good thing but meddling in the Middle East frowned upon? After 20 years in Afghanistan and less than a year after getting out the USA has found something else to throw gobs of US citizens' tax money at.

We don't "need" to get anything. We will get

A reconstituted Soviet Union by time Trump runs for office again in 2024? Halfhearted sanctions knowing the US was not going to throw in with Ukraine. And a Russia with all of Ukraine’s economic output at its disposal.

if we don't help.

Is it not enough we have to spend billions on military security against China. You want to let Putin strengthen Russia's military on the backs of the Eastern European nations he absorbs?
Or is it your assumption if we let our military wither, China and Russia would not bully the rest of the world?

The utter blindness of isolationists arguing that we have nothing to do with Ukraine (or anyone else) is astonishing to me. It's like they have never traveled off the tourist track in any other Country, if they've traveled at all, and have zero awareness of how the daily lives of unnamed people in say, Bangladesh, impacts their own blinkered existence. I suspect that such people nests are sufficiently feathered that they think they don't have to worry about what happens to anyone else. In the short term, that would probably be correct, but here's to hoping that wiser heads prevail before those very nests are raided by the less-well-feathered and all hell breaks loose.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Those charts are not a meaningful comparison.

They show that the US spends shitloads of money on weapons, both before and after the bill under discussion.

Which is all they were intended to do.

I apologise if you thought I was making a completely different point that I didn't mention in any way.

The point is that it's telling only part of the story--which you conveniently clipped out of the quote.