• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Why do House Repubs Oppose Aid to Ukraine?

T
Elixir said:
TomC said:
ideologyhunter said:
It's mind-blowing how the party of Reagan (and earlier, the shrill anti-Communist party) should have morphed into the spectacle that's currently on view.
Click to expand...

It's utterly amazing to me that the party of Reagan is now deep kissing Putin's ass, a former KGB agent turned autocratic tyrant.
Tom
Click to expand...

While “owning the libs” is nice, their main motive is greed. Avarice always takes precedence over “nice”.
Greed is Trump’s hallmark, and the hallmark of The Party of Trump.
Click to expand...
True, but from an economist's perspective, baffling and offending liberal elites is a major part of their brand, and a major driver of ever more critical campaign support.
 
Patooka said:
Part of it is Trump. Part of it is also because the GOP fantasizes being able to do all the authoritative shit Putin gets away with. They hate trans and gays as much as Putin does. Putin has weaponised the Russian Orthodox church the same way Republicans want to do with Christianity (Paula White, Kenneth Copeland John Bennet etc). Political opposition is suppressed in Russia. Journalists speaking out against Dear Leader face prison sentences. The wealth of the nation is consolidated among the top 1%. For some Republicans, dreaming about this stuff is the only way they get hard these days.

Republicans support Putin because they are one and the same. Therefore Putin's enemies are their enemies. It really is that simple. Are you seriously expecting nuance from these people?
Click to expand...
I don't think they actually hate trans and gay that much, but rather are weaponizing it. Pretend they're horrible to make those who support !CHR (I have grown to dislike the LGBTQ+ label--it keeps growing. It's much simpler to be not-cis or not-hetero or not-romantic) look evil.
 
TomC said:

I don't recall a response from @barbos concerning an angry Russian mob storming an airport to hunt down Jews.
Perhaps I just missed it?


These Russians attacked a plane load of international travelers because the flight originated in Tel Aviv.

Now that's some serious Nazi shit. There's no comparison to a speech in Ottawa.
Tom
Click to expand...
Disagree--I don't think it was Nazi shit, but rather Islamist shit.
 
TomC said:
I don't recall a response from @barbos concerning an angry Russian mob storming an airport to hunt down Jews.
Perhaps I just missed it?
Click to expand...
First of all, that were not russians, not ethnic russians anyway. That were muslims from republic Dagestan. Second of all, they were all arrested and attorney general in Dagestan is a ...... ethnic jew apparently :)
Third of all, the whole thing started on telegram channels linked to people in ..... Ukraine.
So, yeah, Russia has muslims.
 
Cheerful Charlie said:
The Ukranians are getting more ATACMS missiles. Kiss that Kersh bridge goodbye.
Click to expand...
With cluster bomblets? I don't think so.
None of your wunderwaffe has helped nazies. Not your tanks not tiny amount of these stupid ATACMS, most of which get intercepted anyway.
 
ideologyhunter said:
By the way, thanks a ton for completing derailing this thread. Why not start your own thread next time you need to rant?
Click to expand...
If I started a new thread every time I wanted to rant, I'd push everything else off the New Threads page.

Anyway I did want to discuss House QOPsters and their eagerness to keep licking the nuts of the Putin-licker-in-Chief.
Maybe they'd support a bill giving aid to Russia? They could throw in the Big Bucks that Immigration and Customs Enforcement needs and try for support from the rational side of the aisle.

We really must sympathize with the QOPAnon party, and their heavy workload in the House of Reps:
  • They need to develop their case in the Trial of the Century: Sean Hannity et al vs The Second Cabinet Secretary Ever to be Impeached. Alejandro Mayorkas -- the very name shrieks proof of criminality -- is accused of 92 criminal counts, and personally airlifting rapists, tax fraudsters and insurrectionists across the Rio Grande. The nation holds its breath as this criminal mastermind is finally brought to justice. Will the prosecution use the famous lawyer Alina Habba to help put this heinous fetanyl trafficker behind bars? Is he, as some are saying, the man who murdered Vince Foster? What did he know about Hunter Biden and when did he know it?
  • A government shutdown is looming for March 1. Admittedly QOPAnon may have overlooked this crisis of their own making; government shutdowns loom all the time these days -- a second one is looming in March just a week after the March 1 deadline.
  • Taking Alejandro Mayorkas away in handcuffs will not solve the border problem. ICE simply does not have enough money to hold immigrants in custody and is legally obligated to release them: Child traffickers, peddlers of Top Secret documents, people who want to steal your $2/hour fruit-picking job, and some I'm sure are good people.
  • But wily Democrats have tied support for ICE to support for an enemy of America's most important ally -- Putin's Russia.
  • As if these urgent matters were not enough, QOPAnon must continue its search for a replacement for Speaker Kevin McCarthy.

Undecided about which of these matters is most urgent, House Republicans have ... voted themselves yet another vacation! Some people complain that this is the House Which Accomplishes Nothing, but in one category it is setting records! -- the Most Vacation Days of any House in the modern era. But don't worry! They plan to reconvene on February 28, in plenty of time to kick the March 1 shutdown down the road.

I say "Hats off!" to House Republicans. And with experienced committee chairmen fleeing in droves they will soon be able to cram the House full of intelligent patriots in the mold of Lauren Boebert, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Paul Gosar, Matt Gaetz and Jim Jordan. Surely these names will someday be compared to renowned statesmen like Henry Clay, Daniel Webster, John Quincy Adams, Dennis Hastert and Newt Gingrich.
 
To the OP. I think there are a number of reasons.
First, the House GOP is a very fractious group, and any faction can stymie the speaker into paralysis with the threat of ouster.
Second, I think it is clear that for some GOP members, this is a bargaining chip to get more border security. The Senate come up with a compromise but it is does not go far enough for some members. Now, if they were smart and confident of keeping the House in the upcoming elections, they'd take the compromise now, and then strengthen it after the elections. That would allow some quicker action and, in the event they don't keep the House and/or take the Senate, to get some border security.
Third, there are some who are fiscal conservatives and don't want to increase the deficit.
Fourth, there are some who are putting party before national interest and don't want to hand Biden a "win".

All of this results in the USA looking indecisive and unreliable to our international allies.
 
laughing dog said:
To the OP. I think there are a number of reasons.
First, the House GOP is a very fractious group, and any faction can stymie the speaker into paralysis with the threat of ouster.
Second, I think it is clear that for some GOP members, this is a bargaining chip to get more border security. The Senate come up with a compromise but it is does not go far enough for some members. Now, if they were smart and confident of keeping the House in the upcoming elections, they'd take the compromise now, and then strengthen it after the elections. That would allow some quicker action and, in the event they don't keep the House and/or take the Senate, to get some border security.
Third, there are some who are fiscal conservatives and don't want to increase the deficit.
Fourth, there are some who are putting party before national interest and don't want to hand Biden a "win".

All of this results in the USA looking indecisive and unreliable to our international allies.
Click to expand...

Your first point is interesting to me, because it is a recent development that coincides - or perhaps collides? - with the entrance of Trump into the equation. The GOP during the post-Nixon years were not fractious. They closed ranks as a matter of political survival, and throughout the 80s and 90s were conditioned to follow the leader and all get "on message" together. When Trump came along and swept the primaries, even people who hated him and predicted (correctly) that he would destroy the party dutifully lined up and kissed the ring. Now the MAGA faction calls the shots, and since Trump sides with Putin, they have to do so as well.

The US has a long history of both parties setting aside their differences when it comes to wars and proxy wars. There was never a real question of backing NATO or supporting Israel or standing up to China. It was only a question of how much and how hard. Now you've got a candidate (and former President) who is essentially "all in" on not just supporting Russia, but also wants to destroy NATO and probably align with China and North Korea as well. And for the MAGA faction that controls the GOP electorate, they're just uneducated enough to simply side with Trump when he tells them Ukraine is really the bad guys and Vlad is our buddy. The factions in the GOP who know better are stuck, because they lined up behind the guy before and now they have no other option.

p.s. as I'm sure you're well aware, their commitment to "border security" is a sham. It's nothing more than a talking point to rile up the villagers and scare monger about "hordes" of brown people. The GOP has always sold themselves as "tough on border security" but happily look the other way when their business backers need some strong backs to keep the corporate agriculture machine going.
 
ideologyhunter said:
I really don't get much about the Republicans anymore, but the opposition to increased aid to Ukraine is especially baffling. Is it mostly the Trump factor? Trump's muddled thinking about Russia should offer no one a road map to Ukraine policy.
Click to expand...
I haven’t read the whole thread but I believe that is 99% plus, all about Cheato. Cheato got his money from laundering rubles, got elected with Putler’s help and blessing, and desperately wants to be the guy who brought down NATO and set the world literally on fire. At this point the alternative is to die penniless and powerless in prison.

So expect ALL the stops to be pulled. Trump has every single Republican politico by the short and curlies. He can put an end to any one of them with a word. That leaves them wishing, on some level, that everyone else could be forced to the same level of obsequious obeisance that they suffer. It’s a deadly toxic mix, and our only hope of surviving as a democratic nation is to get hold of all three branches of government before they do, and build the required firewalls against autocracy.

laughing dog said:
for some GOP members, this is a bargaining chip to get more border security.
Click to expand...

Nope. They might have gone into negotiations thinking so, but Trump would not benefit from their bargaining success, so it ain’t gonna happen. The LAST thing Trump needs is for another prime source of the chaos upon which he feeds so gluttonously, to evaporate.
The House’s mandate from The Person Keeping Them In Office is to make the “border crisis” worse, not better. And keep Ukraine helpless so Pootey and his autocrat friends won’t hesitate to help Agent Orange grab the reins of power this fall, by hook or crook. For any elected Republican it’s get on board or go home.
 
Ford said:
laughing dog said:
To the OP. I think there are a number of reasons.
First, the House GOP is a very fractious group, and any faction can stymie the speaker into paralysis with the threat of ouster.
Second, I think it is clear that for some GOP members, this is a bargaining chip to get more border security. The Senate come up with a compromise but it is does not go far enough for some members. Now, if they were smart and confident of keeping the House in the upcoming elections, they'd take the compromise now, and then strengthen it after the elections. That would allow some quicker action and, in the event they don't keep the House and/or take the Senate, to get some border security.
Third, there are some who are fiscal conservatives and don't want to increase the deficit.
Fourth, there are some who are putting party before national interest and don't want to hand Biden a "win".

All of this results in the USA looking indecisive and unreliable to our international allies.
Click to expand...

Your first point is interesting to me, because it is a recent development that coincides - or perhaps collides? - with the entrance of Trump into the equation. The GOP during the post-Nixon years were not fractious. They closed ranks as a matter of political survival, and throughout the 80s and 90s were conditioned to follow the leader and all get "on message" together. When Trump came along and swept the primaries, even people who hated him and predicted (correctly) that he would destroy the party dutifully lined up and kissed the ring. Now the MAGA faction calls the shots, and since Trump sides with Putin, they have to do so as well.

The US has a long history of both parties setting aside their differences when it comes to wars and proxy wars. There was never a real question of backing NATO or supporting Israel or standing up to China. It was only a question of how much and how hard. Now you've got a candidate (and former President) who is essentially "all in" on not just supporting Russia, but also wants to destroy NATO and probably align with China and North Korea as well. And for the MAGA faction that controls the GOP electorate, they're just uneducated enough to simply side with Trump when he tells them Ukraine is really the bad guys and Vlad is our buddy. The factions in the GOP who know better are stuck, because they lined up behind the guy before and now they have no other option.

p.s. as I'm sure you're well aware, their commitment to "border security" is a sham. It's nothing more than a talking point to rile up the villagers and scare monger about "hordes" of brown people. The GOP has always sold themselves as "tough on border security" but happily look the other way when their business backers need some strong backs to keep the corporate agriculture machine going.
Click to expand...
Of course the border security issue is red meat for white nationalist crowd and their dupes. But politics is sometimes anout seeming to do something.

I will not be surprised if the House does not have a vote on aid for Ukraine by the end of March because Russian gains are getting harder for more rank and file GOP reps to wave off.
 
What an odd thread.

I am unable to speak for the Republicans in the House. But I can offer a glimmer of some insight.

First a quick disclaimer: I loathe Putin. Hope he dies. I wish a Russian General would assassinate that bastard for the good of all the world.

Second disclaimer: I don’t speak for all conservatives, either. In fact, I have (at another Board) had disagreements with some of them. My thinking is conflicted on this issue and a bit in flux, but I still maintain that Putin initiated the conflict and waged war against the civilian population of Ukraine. And he should be denied any shred of reward.

That said: many Republicans see Biden as utterly reckless. He isn’t merely a demented old man controlled by others. (But he is that, too.) His willingness to spend American money and materiel for the benefit of Ukraine also puts America on a flight path towards introducing our troops over there. The general objection is not merely “isolationism.” Instead, as I understand it, the objection is that we have a national obligation to only assist other nations when it also serves our national interest.

If I have sussed out that much correctly, so far, then my guess is that many conservatives fail to see how or why what Russia does to Ukraine is much of our concern.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom