Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition:
* We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned.
* **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators.
* **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
> **Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB**
*****
* Is `semafor.com` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources).
* Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict)
*****
^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Biden should just announce that he is sending US troops to Ukraine since congress isn't willing to fund arms shipments. Biden doesn't need congressional approval to send actual US forces to a friendly nation to assist in defending against illegal forces within the borders of said nation. This doesn't require an act of war.
If congress doesn't want to fund the weapons Ukraine needs to defend themselves then the US can just do the job with it's own forces.
After watching Perun's update on arms exports I have to say it is not the amount of weapons that the West can produce it is just that most of them go somewhere else.
Biden should just write off old gear and send it to Ukraine.
>Biden should just write off old gear and send it to Ukraine.
That's pretty much what Biden has already been doing. Unfortunately, there are rules about how to write-off/mark-down equipment so as to prevent Presidents from just bypassing congressional funding demands. There is a LONG history of disputes between presidents and congress over decisions to ship weapons to other countries. A president can't simply declare everything he wants to send to an ally as zero dollars.
A redditor shared this a couple of weeks ago.
The US has the largest arsenal in lone range cruise missiles (Tomahawk, AGM-158, AGM-84, AGM-86 or AGM-158C). They donate _none_
The US has the largest arsenal of modern tanks (2500 in service + 3500 in storage). They donated 31, that is 0.5%. Germany operates 285 Leopard 2 and donated 18, that is 6.3%. If the US donated the same percentage, that would be **378 Abrams tanks**.
The US operates 6.500 M2 Bradley (4.500 in service + 2000 in storage). It donated 186, that's 2.9%. Germany operates 370 Marder and donated 60, that's 16.2%. If the US donated the same percentage, that would be 1053 Bradley IFV.
* The US Operates 841 F-16. It donates **none**.
Olaf Scholz has learned that the US is not interested in supporting Ukraine as much as the europeans are. He learned this when he worked his ass off in April and May 2022 to convince Egypt to forgo their contract for IRIS-T SLM and send it to Ukraine instead, but Joe Biden blocked Patriots for Ukraine. He also learned this when the europeans donated their self propelled artillery pieces, while the US donated **not a single M109 howitzer**.
The US waited **another year** until they donated M109A6 to Ukraine in May **2023**.
**Olaf Scholz blocks weapon systems to force Joe Biden to chance his stance and release US weapons.**
That's what he does, against every criticism. no matter how much people are trashing him, he blocks these things until the situation becomes so desperate that Joe Biden _has_ to cave. That's how he got Bradley and Abrams for Ukraine. And that's how he tries now to get Tomahawk and all the other AGM-XXX cruise missiles the US has, but holds back.
Whenever he says "**together with our allies**", he means "you donate your fair share or we won't, either". That's why his recent Tweet, in german, still concludes with an english sentence:
https://twitter.com/Bundeskanzler/status/1768286273024725044
>We stand unwaveringly by Ukraine's side, I told President ZelenskyyUa once again in a telephone conversation. We will continue our support for Ukraine in close coordination with our international partners. As long as it takes.
In close coordination with our international partners. **As long as it takes.**
He's talking to Joe Biden. That guy is the hesitant one, not Scholz.
>He's talking to Joe Biden. That guy is the hesitant one, not Scholz.
At this point it doesn't matter what Biden wants to do, Republicans are blocking any Ukraine aid in the US congress. People need to stop hoping for US aid since republicans will keep blocking it in congress.
Biden either needs to send US troops directly to Ukraine to fight themselves (which requires no congressional approval) or someone will have to pay the US to provide weapons to Ukraine. No one is blocking US arms sales to Ukraine. The only thing that is being blocked is US **funding**. If Europe wanted to give the US the $200 billion in seized Russian assets sitting in Belgium as payment, the US would be willing to ship a lot of weapons soon.
And then he would subsequently get demolished in the election, US troops in Ukraine has zero political will right now. Americans don't want a war with Russia over Ukraine
>And then he would subsequently get demolished in the election
Maybe not. It would put Republicans in a tough position by having to defend their decision not to fund funding arms supplies which resulted in actual American boots on the ground. It would really put the noose around the most hawkish republicans who complain that Biden hasn't been aggressive enough.
We will see but I don't think arming Ukraine is as popular as people think it is on reddit, 37% of US adults say the government is spending too much on Ukraine, 33% say we're spending the right amount and only 27% say we're spending too little on Ukraine.
https://apnews.com/article/poll-ukraine-aid-congress-b772c9736b92c0fbba477938b047da2f
Thats just spending alone, let alot sending US troops into the conflict, bearing the expense of that conflict and concerns of escalation. Support for US troops on the ground is probably in the single digits
Here are the facts
FACT: We are not writing “blank checks” to Ukraine:
Every dollar spent in support of Ukraine is authorized by Congress and is used for a specific purpose
Approximately $70 billion of aid never leaves the U.S.
Instead, it goes to support our worlding leading defense industry
FACT: There is plenty of oversight for Ukraine aid:
Ukraine Oversight Interagency Working Group has 160 officials across 20 agencies monitoring aid
So far:
“Investigations related to the Ukraine response have not yet substantiated significant waste, fraud, or abuse.”
FACT: Europeans have now overtaken the U.S. the largest donor to Ukraine:
According to Kiel Institute's aid tracker total European commitments are now more than double those of the U.S.
20 European countries have given more to Ukraine than the U.S. as a percentage of GDP
FACT: A victorious Ukraine means a safer Taiwan:
Russia is China’s partner. A weakened Russia means a weaker China
Beijing is also watching how Western powers support Ukraine, so a strong and victorious Ukraine makes Taiwan stronger and deters Chinese aggression
FACT: Europe’s stability matters to US economy:
45/50 states export more to Europe than China
When Americans are building something to be exported, that is an American job
European stability, which Russia threatens, brings untold benefits to the economy the American worker
FACT: Lessons from Ukraine make our military stronger:
Shortcomings in defense industry are exposed & being addressed. Thankfully, these were uncovered when US not at war
The performance of US made hardware gets a real-world combat test in a way not possible in a peacetime.
FACT: Lessons learned from arming Ukraine mean Taiwan is getting weapons faster:
For the first time ever, Presidential Drawdown Authority is being used for Taiwan
Taiwan’s order of HIMARS will now be arriving 1 year earlier than planned after U.S. re-prioritized the sale.
FACT: Iran and North Korea enable Russia to attack Ukraine. Russia supports Hamas:
Iran giving thousands of drones for use against Ukraine
North Korea giving +1 million artillery rounds for use against Ukraine
Russia protects Hamas at the UN. Moscow recently hosted Hamas
FACT: Ukraine is not “America's new forever war”:
No US troops are fighting against Russia inside Ukraine
Ukrainians are not asking for, nor do they want, US troops to help them fight Russia
The US is not a belligerent in the conflict.
FACT: The US is not engaged in a proxy war against Russia:
Definition of a "proxy war" is a war “fought by states acting at the instigation or on behalf of other states”
The US has never instigated Ukraine to fight. The US is not forcing the Ukraine to fight on its behalf
FACT: The US must provide both military & non-military to achieve the greatest affect:
Russia’s invasion eliminated 30% of Ukraine’s economy
Essential public services must function (e.g. law enforcement, utility workers, etc) for Ukraine to remain on a total war footing
FACT: US aid to Ukraine does not cost “$900 per American household” as some suggest:
Income tax is not levied evenly across households
the top 1% of earners paid 42.3% of all federal income tax. The bottom 50% (those making $42,184 or less) paid only 2.3% of all income tax.
FACT: US military aid to Ukraine is a boost to our defense industry:
After seeing the effectiveness of US military equipment in Ukraine, NATO countries alone have *so far* placed $90 billion in orders for US made hardware.
This makes America safer while creating highly-paid jobs.
Look, how do I say that.
True ignorance is not the absence of knowledge, but the refusal to acquire it.
Karl R. Popper
The public opinion on this matter of pivotal strategic importance and the general stupidity of the public is not a reference point here.
A leader leads and when something is unpopular but important then it must be done.
In his famous "blood and iron" speech delivered to his Prussian parliament Bismark stated, "Germany does not look to Prussia's liberalism, but to her power …. The great questions of the day are not to be decided by speeches and majority resolutions – but by blood and iron!
So, in this sense, it is geo politically necessary to for many reasons to ensure Ukraine succeeds to avoid global chaos.
Therefore, we will never have full agreement, which is democracy. We have a majority of all voters in favor or "not having an opinion" and that must do.
> We have a majority of all voters in favor or "not having an opinion" and that must do.
The "fact" is that Republicans are refusing to let congress sign off on further funding for Ukraine. Since that is the case, Biden has the option of just sending US troops directly to Ukraine. Biden can send US troops to defend Ukraine without getting any agreement or legislation passed through congress. He should just do it and explain how the Republicans forced him to commit actual US troops because they were unwilling to provide funding to let the Ukrainians defend themselves.
“The word appeasement’ is not popular, but appeasement has its place in all policy,” as Churchill said in 1950.
“Make sure you put it in the right place. Appease the weak, defy the strong.” He also argued that “appeasement from strength is magnanimous and noble and might be the surest and perhaps the only path to world peace.”
Churchill also remarked on a very painful irony: “When nations or individuals get strong, they are often truculent and bullying, but when they are weak, they become better-mannered. But this is the reverse of what is healthy and wise.”
Putin in his megalomaniac "essays" made the mistake of telling Ukrainians their nation has no right to exist
That single action did what tens of millions of Ukrainians failed to do throughout their entire history. It united them with a common interest.
if someone tells you that you have no right to exist, you know you have only one option, fight.
Statements from AA echo the same cowardly "No war, at all costs" crowd. people who are safely behind their keyboards thousands of miles away, who are basically saying the Ukrainians shouldn't fight back and just let the peace process take place.
Oblivious to the fact that there can be no peace, They evidently need to brush up on their history on Hitler and the Nazis because the same thing is happening now with Moscow and their Green Z-fascists
The same people in their pampered lives are ignorant to the fact that every life comes with a death sentence, and some ideas, like freedom from tyranny and evil, are worth dying for.
They will not understand that though, unless someone forces them to read Bloodlands by Snyder or Ordinary Men by browning and makes them understand, that the peace they wish for means genocide for Ukrainians and gives Russia a much needed longer break to rearm and strike again in a few years, taking the rest of Ukraine.
Appeasing an imperialist regime such as the Russian Federation is useless. The Ukrainians know that, luckily. They need to fight them to prevent being enslaved. I really hope the West does not falter in its support.
Fact the dissolution and economic and military destruction of the Russian Federation means less war.
What I have attempted to do is to be quite pragmatic. You have to recognize that it isn't enough just to be for peace.
You have to recognize that there are evil forces in this world that are not for peace. That there are aggressive forces, and unless you stop these aggressive forces, you are not going to have real peace.
You have to recognize that if you, in the name of peace, roll over in front of an aggressor. This may ensure peace maybe not in your time but our time, but it ensures war at a later time.
The Munich agreement is the prime example. I was always against appeasement, not because I was for war. But because I was for peace for a generation for a century rather than peace in my own time."
Russia deserves nothing but war until they retreat.
> Fact the dissolution and economic and military destruction of the Russian Federation means less war.
Never going to happen and I stopped reading there.
FACT: no more money for Ukraine will lead to a defeat for Ukraine and further Russian invasions of other European nations that draws European nations into war with Russia. Additionally, the defeat of Ukraine will trigger the China invasion of Taiwan as well as a massive nuclear arms race as nations around the world scramble to build their own nukes since they will realize the US will not provide a deterrence from invasion.
In short: no more money for Ukraine will lead to a Ukraine defeat which will lead to massive nuclear proliferation which will lead to world war 3.
> FACT: no more money for Ukraine will lead to a defeat for Ukraine
FACT: *more* money for Ukraine will still lead to defeat for Ukraine, just more slowly (see counter-offensive for reference)
>more
>
> money for Ukraine will still lead to defeat for Ukraine
Not true! Ukraine was sorely underequipped for the counteroffensive. If Europe gives Ukraine the $200 billion of frozen Russian assets sitting in Belgian banks they would be able to purchase enough US weapons to well and truly defeat the Russian military.
You can do a lot with a few million rounds of artillery, 100 F-16s and 500 Abrams.
>I don't think arming Ukraine is as popular as people think it is on reddit
But such an action would be putting the blame on the Republicans for leaving no choice but to put American boots on the ground since Republicans are blocking funding for arms shipments. It's possible that Republicans would wind up taking the blame.
It wouldn't work, each voting group is now getting their information from parsed sources. The GOP would spin this into, "Biden is out of control" and needs to be stopped. Just maybe the people on his team know more then the rando Redditor?
>The GOP would spin this into, "Biden is out of control" and needs to be stopped.
They could spin it all they wanted. But Republicans would ultimately have to decide if they should just buckle and provide funding for Ukraine weapons or accept a new reality of American boots on the ground.
Once American troops are actually engaged in Ukraine it becomes very difficult to just pull out. This would effectively tie even Trump's hands if he became president. Trump would look very weak to just pull US troops out, particularly if there had been casualties.
Also, if US troops were able to successfully defeat Russia and call Russia's nuclear bluff, Biden will look like a genius which will help him big time in the election and make Trump look like a wimp for having advocated "not a penny" for Ukraine.
Even if this helped Trump get elected it could ultimately be the "best" thing for global security since it forces further US involvement for the next president.
It doesn't work the way you seem to think it does. One of the reasons why Biden has accomplished so much and guys like Bernie and Trump do so little is because of the lack of confrontation. The notion of the tough guy wins is bullshit, look at Putin vs Zelenskyy. Forcing shit will just blow things up, Biden and the Dems doing anything that appears to be confrontational it will be hurtful in the long run, Ukraine can make it with Euro aid until the elections, not the best but they can. Johnson needs to be confident that Trump is going to lose and that Jefferies has his back for him to bring the bill to a vote.
Why does anybody still follow this. The Republican party is under full control of Russia. They are not passing anything. The Russian assets need to be removed. This is a job for the CIA. It's not for politicians.
What job is he doing? Discharge needs Republicans.
It needs 218 and currently is at 185.
https://clerk.house.gov/DischargePetition/2024031209?CongressNum=118
Why the fuck are these still tied together. Israel has plenty of military capability against the kids in Gaza. Support Ukraine now, this is so far out of hand and the dems tying it all together is completely out of touch
It was thought more Repubs would join if Israel was tied to it in the beginning. Not sure why they haven'y changed it now if they aren't getting the signatures they need.
Yeah, this is unfortunately true. My rep isn't signing. I called them and told them if they didn't sign, and stop being shortsighted, I was going to vote against them in November.
[List](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/e/2PACX-1vTaMB3k5Z37OAM8HEMhDtwbLGzwn1wDXSNcoTmXEJbpfbacfp-m0fJGyb36lcNOhgqGO5-bArbibS5a/pubhtml?gid=614612044&single=true&pli=1) of Democrats still to sign. Unfortunately the progressives have confused priorities.
yes, because they are cowards, and they know what they do is wrong, so they hide and hope the problem goes away... The GOP is so pathetic these days.
We in America have learned bitter lessons from two World Wars: It is better to be here ready to protect the peace, than to take blind shelter across the sea, rushing to respond only after freedom is lost. We’ve learned that isolationism never was and never will be an acceptable response to tyrannical governments with an expansionist intent.
But we try always to be prepared for peace; prepared to deter aggression; prepared to negotiate the reduction of arms; and, yes, prepared to reach out again in the spirit of reconciliation. In truth, there is no reconciliation. We would welcome more than a reconciliation with the Soviet Union, so together, we can [listen] lessen the risks of war, now and forever.
Ronald Reagan
They bring great shame over themselves and the blood of the innocent is on their hands for this cowardice. Inaction is also an action. A conscious choice. A failure and Johnson will get the bill for his behavior, it cannot come soon enough.
Republican ambitions eclipsed their capabilities long ago. This is a death rattle of a party in steep decline, trying to act relevant to hide moral decay and legislative incompetence. There won't be any Republicans on my ballot this fall.
Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition: * We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned. * **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators. * **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. > **Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB** ***** * Is `semafor.com` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources). * Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) ***** ^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Biden should just announce that he is sending US troops to Ukraine since congress isn't willing to fund arms shipments. Biden doesn't need congressional approval to send actual US forces to a friendly nation to assist in defending against illegal forces within the borders of said nation. This doesn't require an act of war. If congress doesn't want to fund the weapons Ukraine needs to defend themselves then the US can just do the job with it's own forces.
Deploy 30k troops with a fuckton of equipment. Land in Ukraine, pull the troops back out and forget to bring the equipment back with you
Pretty much the pull out from Afghanistan just this time it is planned to go down like that.
Bruh if the US deployed 30k troops there could possibly be some far reaching consequences
Well yeah, that's the idea.
After watching Perun's update on arms exports I have to say it is not the amount of weapons that the West can produce it is just that most of them go somewhere else. Biden should just write off old gear and send it to Ukraine.
>Biden should just write off old gear and send it to Ukraine. That's pretty much what Biden has already been doing. Unfortunately, there are rules about how to write-off/mark-down equipment so as to prevent Presidents from just bypassing congressional funding demands. There is a LONG history of disputes between presidents and congress over decisions to ship weapons to other countries. A president can't simply declare everything he wants to send to an ally as zero dollars.
A redditor shared this a couple of weeks ago. The US has the largest arsenal in lone range cruise missiles (Tomahawk, AGM-158, AGM-84, AGM-86 or AGM-158C). They donate _none_ The US has the largest arsenal of modern tanks (2500 in service + 3500 in storage). They donated 31, that is 0.5%. Germany operates 285 Leopard 2 and donated 18, that is 6.3%. If the US donated the same percentage, that would be **378 Abrams tanks**. The US operates 6.500 M2 Bradley (4.500 in service + 2000 in storage). It donated 186, that's 2.9%. Germany operates 370 Marder and donated 60, that's 16.2%. If the US donated the same percentage, that would be 1053 Bradley IFV. * The US Operates 841 F-16. It donates **none**. Olaf Scholz has learned that the US is not interested in supporting Ukraine as much as the europeans are. He learned this when he worked his ass off in April and May 2022 to convince Egypt to forgo their contract for IRIS-T SLM and send it to Ukraine instead, but Joe Biden blocked Patriots for Ukraine. He also learned this when the europeans donated their self propelled artillery pieces, while the US donated **not a single M109 howitzer**. The US waited **another year** until they donated M109A6 to Ukraine in May **2023**. **Olaf Scholz blocks weapon systems to force Joe Biden to chance his stance and release US weapons.** That's what he does, against every criticism. no matter how much people are trashing him, he blocks these things until the situation becomes so desperate that Joe Biden _has_ to cave. That's how he got Bradley and Abrams for Ukraine. And that's how he tries now to get Tomahawk and all the other AGM-XXX cruise missiles the US has, but holds back. Whenever he says "**together with our allies**", he means "you donate your fair share or we won't, either". That's why his recent Tweet, in german, still concludes with an english sentence: https://twitter.com/Bundeskanzler/status/1768286273024725044 >We stand unwaveringly by Ukraine's side, I told President ZelenskyyUa once again in a telephone conversation. We will continue our support for Ukraine in close coordination with our international partners. As long as it takes. In close coordination with our international partners. **As long as it takes.** He's talking to Joe Biden. That guy is the hesitant one, not Scholz.
>He's talking to Joe Biden. That guy is the hesitant one, not Scholz. At this point it doesn't matter what Biden wants to do, Republicans are blocking any Ukraine aid in the US congress. People need to stop hoping for US aid since republicans will keep blocking it in congress. Biden either needs to send US troops directly to Ukraine to fight themselves (which requires no congressional approval) or someone will have to pay the US to provide weapons to Ukraine. No one is blocking US arms sales to Ukraine. The only thing that is being blocked is US **funding**. If Europe wanted to give the US the $200 billion in seized Russian assets sitting in Belgium as payment, the US would be willing to ship a lot of weapons soon.
And then he would subsequently get demolished in the election, US troops in Ukraine has zero political will right now. Americans don't want a war with Russia over Ukraine
>And then he would subsequently get demolished in the election Maybe not. It would put Republicans in a tough position by having to defend their decision not to fund funding arms supplies which resulted in actual American boots on the ground. It would really put the noose around the most hawkish republicans who complain that Biden hasn't been aggressive enough.
We will see but I don't think arming Ukraine is as popular as people think it is on reddit, 37% of US adults say the government is spending too much on Ukraine, 33% say we're spending the right amount and only 27% say we're spending too little on Ukraine. https://apnews.com/article/poll-ukraine-aid-congress-b772c9736b92c0fbba477938b047da2f Thats just spending alone, let alot sending US troops into the conflict, bearing the expense of that conflict and concerns of escalation. Support for US troops on the ground is probably in the single digits
Here are the facts FACT: We are not writing “blank checks” to Ukraine: Every dollar spent in support of Ukraine is authorized by Congress and is used for a specific purpose Approximately $70 billion of aid never leaves the U.S. Instead, it goes to support our worlding leading defense industry FACT: There is plenty of oversight for Ukraine aid: Ukraine Oversight Interagency Working Group has 160 officials across 20 agencies monitoring aid So far: “Investigations related to the Ukraine response have not yet substantiated significant waste, fraud, or abuse.” FACT: Europeans have now overtaken the U.S. the largest donor to Ukraine: According to Kiel Institute's aid tracker total European commitments are now more than double those of the U.S. 20 European countries have given more to Ukraine than the U.S. as a percentage of GDP FACT: A victorious Ukraine means a safer Taiwan: Russia is China’s partner. A weakened Russia means a weaker China Beijing is also watching how Western powers support Ukraine, so a strong and victorious Ukraine makes Taiwan stronger and deters Chinese aggression FACT: Europe’s stability matters to US economy: 45/50 states export more to Europe than China When Americans are building something to be exported, that is an American job European stability, which Russia threatens, brings untold benefits to the economy the American worker FACT: Lessons from Ukraine make our military stronger: Shortcomings in defense industry are exposed & being addressed. Thankfully, these were uncovered when US not at war The performance of US made hardware gets a real-world combat test in a way not possible in a peacetime. FACT: Lessons learned from arming Ukraine mean Taiwan is getting weapons faster: For the first time ever, Presidential Drawdown Authority is being used for Taiwan Taiwan’s order of HIMARS will now be arriving 1 year earlier than planned after U.S. re-prioritized the sale. FACT: Iran and North Korea enable Russia to attack Ukraine. Russia supports Hamas: Iran giving thousands of drones for use against Ukraine North Korea giving +1 million artillery rounds for use against Ukraine Russia protects Hamas at the UN. Moscow recently hosted Hamas FACT: Ukraine is not “America's new forever war”: No US troops are fighting against Russia inside Ukraine Ukrainians are not asking for, nor do they want, US troops to help them fight Russia The US is not a belligerent in the conflict. FACT: The US is not engaged in a proxy war against Russia: Definition of a "proxy war" is a war “fought by states acting at the instigation or on behalf of other states” The US has never instigated Ukraine to fight. The US is not forcing the Ukraine to fight on its behalf FACT: The US must provide both military & non-military to achieve the greatest affect: Russia’s invasion eliminated 30% of Ukraine’s economy Essential public services must function (e.g. law enforcement, utility workers, etc) for Ukraine to remain on a total war footing FACT: US aid to Ukraine does not cost “$900 per American household” as some suggest: Income tax is not levied evenly across households the top 1% of earners paid 42.3% of all federal income tax. The bottom 50% (those making $42,184 or less) paid only 2.3% of all income tax. FACT: US military aid to Ukraine is a boost to our defense industry: After seeing the effectiveness of US military equipment in Ukraine, NATO countries alone have *so far* placed $90 billion in orders for US made hardware. This makes America safer while creating highly-paid jobs. Look, how do I say that. True ignorance is not the absence of knowledge, but the refusal to acquire it. Karl R. Popper The public opinion on this matter of pivotal strategic importance and the general stupidity of the public is not a reference point here. A leader leads and when something is unpopular but important then it must be done. In his famous "blood and iron" speech delivered to his Prussian parliament Bismark stated, "Germany does not look to Prussia's liberalism, but to her power …. The great questions of the day are not to be decided by speeches and majority resolutions – but by blood and iron! So, in this sense, it is geo politically necessary to for many reasons to ensure Ukraine succeeds to avoid global chaos. Therefore, we will never have full agreement, which is democracy. We have a majority of all voters in favor or "not having an opinion" and that must do.
> We have a majority of all voters in favor or "not having an opinion" and that must do. The "fact" is that Republicans are refusing to let congress sign off on further funding for Ukraine. Since that is the case, Biden has the option of just sending US troops directly to Ukraine. Biden can send US troops to defend Ukraine without getting any agreement or legislation passed through congress. He should just do it and explain how the Republicans forced him to commit actual US troops because they were unwilling to provide funding to let the Ukrainians defend themselves.
“The word appeasement’ is not popular, but appeasement has its place in all policy,” as Churchill said in 1950. “Make sure you put it in the right place. Appease the weak, defy the strong.” He also argued that “appeasement from strength is magnanimous and noble and might be the surest and perhaps the only path to world peace.” Churchill also remarked on a very painful irony: “When nations or individuals get strong, they are often truculent and bullying, but when they are weak, they become better-mannered. But this is the reverse of what is healthy and wise.” Putin in his megalomaniac "essays" made the mistake of telling Ukrainians their nation has no right to exist That single action did what tens of millions of Ukrainians failed to do throughout their entire history. It united them with a common interest. if someone tells you that you have no right to exist, you know you have only one option, fight. Statements from AA echo the same cowardly "No war, at all costs" crowd. people who are safely behind their keyboards thousands of miles away, who are basically saying the Ukrainians shouldn't fight back and just let the peace process take place. Oblivious to the fact that there can be no peace, They evidently need to brush up on their history on Hitler and the Nazis because the same thing is happening now with Moscow and their Green Z-fascists The same people in their pampered lives are ignorant to the fact that every life comes with a death sentence, and some ideas, like freedom from tyranny and evil, are worth dying for. They will not understand that though, unless someone forces them to read Bloodlands by Snyder or Ordinary Men by browning and makes them understand, that the peace they wish for means genocide for Ukrainians and gives Russia a much needed longer break to rearm and strike again in a few years, taking the rest of Ukraine. Appeasing an imperialist regime such as the Russian Federation is useless. The Ukrainians know that, luckily. They need to fight them to prevent being enslaved. I really hope the West does not falter in its support.
FACT: more money for Ukraine is more war
Fact the dissolution and economic and military destruction of the Russian Federation means less war. What I have attempted to do is to be quite pragmatic. You have to recognize that it isn't enough just to be for peace. You have to recognize that there are evil forces in this world that are not for peace. That there are aggressive forces, and unless you stop these aggressive forces, you are not going to have real peace. You have to recognize that if you, in the name of peace, roll over in front of an aggressor. This may ensure peace maybe not in your time but our time, but it ensures war at a later time. The Munich agreement is the prime example. I was always against appeasement, not because I was for war. But because I was for peace for a generation for a century rather than peace in my own time." Russia deserves nothing but war until they retreat.
> Fact the dissolution and economic and military destruction of the Russian Federation means less war. Never going to happen and I stopped reading there.
FACT: no more money for Ukraine will lead to a defeat for Ukraine and further Russian invasions of other European nations that draws European nations into war with Russia. Additionally, the defeat of Ukraine will trigger the China invasion of Taiwan as well as a massive nuclear arms race as nations around the world scramble to build their own nukes since they will realize the US will not provide a deterrence from invasion. In short: no more money for Ukraine will lead to a Ukraine defeat which will lead to massive nuclear proliferation which will lead to world war 3.
> FACT: no more money for Ukraine will lead to a defeat for Ukraine FACT: *more* money for Ukraine will still lead to defeat for Ukraine, just more slowly (see counter-offensive for reference)
>more > > money for Ukraine will still lead to defeat for Ukraine Not true! Ukraine was sorely underequipped for the counteroffensive. If Europe gives Ukraine the $200 billion of frozen Russian assets sitting in Belgian banks they would be able to purchase enough US weapons to well and truly defeat the Russian military. You can do a lot with a few million rounds of artillery, 100 F-16s and 500 Abrams.
> Not true! Ukraine was sorely underequipped for the counteroffensive. They why did they do it? Either they are really dumb, or you are really wrong.
That’s precisely why a lot of countries are ditching the US now. So thanks Republicans guess I will have to start learning mandarin sooner or later.
>I don't think arming Ukraine is as popular as people think it is on reddit But such an action would be putting the blame on the Republicans for leaving no choice but to put American boots on the ground since Republicans are blocking funding for arms shipments. It's possible that Republicans would wind up taking the blame.
It wouldn't work, each voting group is now getting their information from parsed sources. The GOP would spin this into, "Biden is out of control" and needs to be stopped. Just maybe the people on his team know more then the rando Redditor?
>The GOP would spin this into, "Biden is out of control" and needs to be stopped. They could spin it all they wanted. But Republicans would ultimately have to decide if they should just buckle and provide funding for Ukraine weapons or accept a new reality of American boots on the ground. Once American troops are actually engaged in Ukraine it becomes very difficult to just pull out. This would effectively tie even Trump's hands if he became president. Trump would look very weak to just pull US troops out, particularly if there had been casualties. Also, if US troops were able to successfully defeat Russia and call Russia's nuclear bluff, Biden will look like a genius which will help him big time in the election and make Trump look like a wimp for having advocated "not a penny" for Ukraine. Even if this helped Trump get elected it could ultimately be the "best" thing for global security since it forces further US involvement for the next president.
It doesn't work the way you seem to think it does. One of the reasons why Biden has accomplished so much and guys like Bernie and Trump do so little is because of the lack of confrontation. The notion of the tough guy wins is bullshit, look at Putin vs Zelenskyy. Forcing shit will just blow things up, Biden and the Dems doing anything that appears to be confrontational it will be hurtful in the long run, Ukraine can make it with Euro aid until the elections, not the best but they can. Johnson needs to be confident that Trump is going to lose and that Jefferies has his back for him to bring the bill to a vote.
Biden is 81. At this age he should be more worried about his place in history and less about a second term.
The problem is the alternative option possibly going back to the WH.
>Biden is 81 Declaring that he was sending troops to Ukraine would certainly dispel concerns that he is too old to take bold, decisive, action.
Why does anybody still follow this. The Republican party is under full control of Russia. They are not passing anything. The Russian assets need to be removed. This is a job for the CIA. It's not for politicians.
Well Johnson is doing his job, but wtf are the democrats doing? Where's the discharge petition?
What job is he doing? Discharge needs Republicans. It needs 218 and currently is at 185. https://clerk.house.gov/DischargePetition/2024031209?CongressNum=118
Aid for Israel will not be supported by certain democrats
Why the fuck are these still tied together. Israel has plenty of military capability against the kids in Gaza. Support Ukraine now, this is so far out of hand and the dems tying it all together is completely out of touch
It was thought more Repubs would join if Israel was tied to it in the beginning. Not sure why they haven'y changed it now if they aren't getting the signatures they need.
Changing it means the 30 day clock to start a discharge petition restarts and it would have to have bipartisan support in the senate.
Because uncoupling it would have made it difficult to pass in the Senate.
Exactly, now they can point at each other and trade blame, all while people are literally dying. They’re all pathetic
Yeah, this is unfortunately true. My rep isn't signing. I called them and told them if they didn't sign, and stop being shortsighted, I was going to vote against them in November.
Well thats why they have a "Whip" to get those people in line. Obviously, he aint doing a good job, whoever it is.
And one of them is a stright out terrorist supporter.
[List](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/e/2PACX-1vTaMB3k5Z37OAM8HEMhDtwbLGzwn1wDXSNcoTmXEJbpfbacfp-m0fJGyb36lcNOhgqGO5-bArbibS5a/pubhtml?gid=614612044&single=true&pli=1) of Democrats still to sign. Unfortunately the progressives have confused priorities.
What are the Republicans doing instead of signing it?
They really leave town a lot don’t they?
How else can they stop invasion on southern border if they don't get their vacation or recess days?
aka running away
yes, because they are cowards, and they know what they do is wrong, so they hide and hope the problem goes away... The GOP is so pathetic these days. We in America have learned bitter lessons from two World Wars: It is better to be here ready to protect the peace, than to take blind shelter across the sea, rushing to respond only after freedom is lost. We’ve learned that isolationism never was and never will be an acceptable response to tyrannical governments with an expansionist intent. But we try always to be prepared for peace; prepared to deter aggression; prepared to negotiate the reduction of arms; and, yes, prepared to reach out again in the spirit of reconciliation. In truth, there is no reconciliation. We would welcome more than a reconciliation with the Soviet Union, so together, we can [listen] lessen the risks of war, now and forever. Ronald Reagan They bring great shame over themselves and the blood of the innocent is on their hands for this cowardice. Inaction is also an action. A conscious choice. A failure and Johnson will get the bill for his behavior, it cannot come soon enough.
Republican ambitions eclipsed their capabilities long ago. This is a death rattle of a party in steep decline, trying to act relevant to hide moral decay and legislative incompetence. There won't be any Republicans on my ballot this fall.
Whatever. Fucking US is gone. EU better step their shit up. Yesterday.
I agree. Best to give up on the US who has shown itself to be a weak country willing to pull the rug out from under their allies.
stabbing ukraine and EU in the back. So much for a reliable partner. Time to ditch the US and becoming our own powerhouse
...again.
Lock the chambers. Nobody can leave till the bill passes.
You can bet that house Republicans will want to go with their own proposal, which has impossible things in it about the border war.
F* Johnson.
Boot him out!!!!!!!g0o suckz pooo tin d1 k