Biden administration announces additional $325 million in military aid to Ukraine

[Hanaguma]

2 hours ago, rudi49jr said:

Imagine being homeless in the US and this flog Trump cuts taxes for the rich and just hands them billions upon billions they have no idea what to do with because they have way too much money already.

So called “trickle down economics” that Republican presidents keep pushing, even though that notion has been debunked years ago. Trump is also much bigger (well, fatter) than Biden, so he wins the prize for biggest waste of space ever.

...and here we go!   "b-b-but Trump...."

...has nothing to do with the war in Ukraine.  Biden flushing 120 billion dollars plus down the drain while his own cities are in chaos is criminal.

[Hanaguma]

3 hours ago, rudi49jr said:

The Putin fan boys are out in force in this thread. Just following orders from their puppet master, no doubt.

It must be easy to dismiss those who disagree with you so cavalierly. But believe it or not, it IS possible to both hope Russia loses AND not support further funding this conflict.  A little nuance goes a long way.

[rudi49jr]

32 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

...and here we go!   "b-b-but Trump...."

...has nothing to do with the war in Ukraine.  Biden flushing 120 billion dollars plus down the drain while his own cities are in chaos is criminal.

Jeez dude, you really need to lighten up. I was just trying to put the poster’s comment in perspective. Giving billions in arms to Ukraine so they can fight a very worthwhile war (which isn’t flushing 120 billion down the drain), or giving billions in tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires who really don’t need the money at all (which is literally flushing billions down the drain). See my point?

Besides, I thought it would be a nice change from the but-but-but Hillary that Republicans keep repeating to this day. That’s really getting old. 

[rudi49jr]

41 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

It must be easy to dismiss those who disagree with you so cavalierly. But believe it or not, it IS possible to both hope Russia loses AND not support further funding this conflict.  A little nuance goes a long way.

It’s not the fact that they disagree with me that gets my goat. Among other things, it’s the way people like you so cavalierly say ‘not my problem’, by which you basically say ‘go screw yourself, Ukraine’.
The only way Russia can lose this is if the West keeps supporting Ukraine with massive donations of arms, because on its own it doesn’t stand a chance. So it is actually NOT possible to hope that Russia loses AND not support further funding of this conflict, because the latter would mean Ukraine will lose. Unless you see some magical way Russia can lose without the West giving tons of support to Ukraine. 

[Hanaguma]

21 minutes ago, rudi49jr said:

It’s not the fact that they disagree with me that gets my goat. Among other things, it’s the way people like you so cavalierly say ‘not my problem’, by which you basically say ‘go screw yourself, Ukraine’.
The only way Russia can lose this is if the West keeps supporting Ukraine with massive donations of arms, because on its own it doesn’t stand a chance. So it is actually NOT possible to hope that Russia loses AND not support further funding of this conflict, because the latter would mean Ukraine will lose. Unless you see some magical way Russia can lose without the West giving tons of support to Ukraine. 

Well, you got that part right.  It's NOT my problem. Whether or not Russia get the Donbas or a few thousand assorted square kms of territory doesn't register with me. 

 

I honestly don't see a scenario where Ukraine comes out unscathed, all territory restored, etc.  Making no attempt to bring Russia to the bargaining table is rank stupidity. Can you tell me a realistic ending that doesn't involve NATO ground/air forces getting involved yet gets victory for Ukraine? All that is happening now is prolonging the inevitable. 

 

Ukraine can't win without other nations intervening directly, and that is a potential nightmare with huge risks and little potential gain. Or is that OK-widening the war to include NATO directly? Because that's what it's gonna take to shift the Russians. 

[ozimoron]

43 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Well, you got that part right.  It's NOT my problem. Whether or not Russia get the Donbas or a few thousand assorted square kms of territory doesn't register with me. 

 

I honestly don't see a scenario where Ukraine comes out unscathed, all territory restored, etc.  Making no attempt to bring Russia to the bargaining table is rank stupidity. Can you tell me a realistic ending that doesn't involve NATO ground/air forces getting involved yet gets victory for Ukraine? All that is happening now is prolonging the inevitable. 

 

Ukraine can't win without other nations intervening directly, and that is a potential nightmare with huge risks and little potential gain. Or is that OK-widening the war to include NATO directly? Because that's what it's gonna take to shift the Russians. 

All good, I think NATO should declare open war against Russia and get this over with. Russia is not going to use nuclear or chemical weapons. .

[rudi49jr]

1 hour ago, Hanaguma said:

Well, you got that part right.  It's NOT my problem. Whether or not Russia get the Donbas or a few thousand assorted square kms of territory doesn't register with me. 

 

I honestly don't see a scenario where Ukraine comes out unscathed, all territory restored, etc.  Making no attempt to bring Russia to the bargaining table is rank stupidity. Can you tell me a realistic ending that doesn't involve NATO ground/air forces getting involved yet gets victory for Ukraine? All that is happening now is prolonging the inevitable. 

 

Ukraine can't win without other nations intervening directly, and that is a potential nightmare with huge risks and little potential gain. Or is that OK-widening the war to include NATO directly? Because that's what it's gonna take to shift the Russians. 

So that indignant huffing and puffing of yours (“it IS possible to both hope Russia loses AND not support further funding this conflict”) was just for show then? Why am I not surprised. 

[Tug]

3 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

...and here we go!   "b-b-but Trump...."

...has nothing to do with the war in Ukraine.  Biden flushing 120 billion dollars plus down the drain while his own cities are in chaos is criminal.

This whole thread is practically about the speaker of the house (squeaker of the house)appearing to waver in his support of Ukraine I know you realize as most do is that this is at the direction of one Donald trump .McCarthy is being pressured by the magganuts in his caucus no more than that so any reference to trump is entirely Germaine to this subject .I hate to crush your hopes but I don’t think America will turn her back on Ukraine .and yes I do believe you would like to see that happen to me you seem to be very anti democracy that’s just my observation from reading your posts no more than that 

[heybruce]

8 hours ago, Thorgal said:

I'm not trolling ; international laws apply for waging war.

If it's a special military operation like NATO bombing 70 days Serbia or Lybia...

So Putin is calling this a special military operation so he doesn't have to abide by international law.  Got it.

 

BTW:  NATO bombed Serbia to end a long running conflict and the genocides that had been committed.  NATO bombed Libya to impose a ceasefire in a civil war.  In both cases there were no NATO casualties and no NATO ground forces employed.

 

It's somewhat different in Russia's war of aggression in Ukraine.

[heybruce]

8 hours ago, Thorgal said:

Believe me, in their target de demilitarize Ukraine, they did find WMD's...

 

And Biden is gonna send some 325KUSD more !

Right.  Tell us about the WMD's that were found.

[heybruce]

5 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

It must be easy to dismiss those who disagree with you so cavalierly. But believe it or not, it IS possible to both hope Russia loses AND not support further funding this conflict.  A little nuance goes a long way.

It's also possible to believe in the Easter Bunny, but it's not realistic.

[heybruce]

3 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

Well, you got that part right.  It's NOT my problem. Whether or not Russia get the Donbas or a few thousand assorted square kms of territory doesn't register with me. 

 

I honestly don't see a scenario where Ukraine comes out unscathed, all territory restored, etc.  Making no attempt to bring Russia to the bargaining table is rank stupidity. Can you tell me a realistic ending that doesn't involve NATO ground/air forces getting involved yet gets victory for Ukraine? All that is happening now is prolonging the inevitable. 

 

Ukraine can't win without other nations intervening directly, and that is a potential nightmare with huge risks and little potential gain. Or is that OK-widening the war to include NATO directly? Because that's what it's gonna take to shift the Russians. 

Negotiate with Putin?  You conveniently ignore that fact that Putin can not be trusted.  He breaks international law and any agreements made, and is determined to destabilize any country bordering Russia that he can not dominate.  You can't negotiate with someone like that.

 

Since you seem China obsessed, consider this:  Allowing Russia to salvage any kind of victory would be a gift to China.  It would announce to the world that wars of conquest are allowed and beneficial.  All the countries in Asia that don't want to be dominated by Russia or China will rush to acquire nuclear weapons.  Do you think this will be a better world?

[Thorgal]

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

Right.  Tell us about the WMD's that were found.

Biolabs.

[heybruce]

3 minutes ago, Thorgal said:

Biolabs.

Do you mean medical research centers?  The places that did not have the capability or interest in weaponizing anything?

[Thorgal]

Just now, heybruce said:

Do you mean medical research centers?  The places that did not have the capability or interest in weaponizing anything?

The ones that Fauci can't bring into the US...

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, Thorgal said:

The ones that Fauci can't bring into the US...

Making it up as you go along, aren't you?

 

Why not provide some credible sources for you claims?  While your at it, explain how these labs qualify as WMD's.

[Skipalongcassidy]

21 hours ago, ozimoron said:

It's imperative that the Dems win the next election or Russia will succeed in it's invasion of Ukraine and get away with it's crimes against humanity.

How many dollars has Australia donated compared to the dollars donated by the USA?  Pretty much nothing.

[IAMHERE]

How much in 'aid' does Zelenski and his buddies syphon off?

[thaibeachlovers]

18 hours ago, JCauto said:

Thanks. What exactly has qualified Mr. Smith as "wise"? Has he a body of writing or research that has achieved any level of significance or has been widely referenced? What is his expertise and qualifications?

Not saying he isn't, but that usually these are the things that "wise" people have that demonstrate their knowledge and understanding.

What on earth are you on about? Perhaps you could address the quotation given by Hanaguma without trying to denigrate the person who said it. That's a unwarranted deflection.

IMO it's entirely relevant given history of US supporting people that later become enemies.

[thaibeachlovers]

Given that Ukraine is hugely corrupt, one wonders just how much of that money will actually go to where it's supposed to.

[thaibeachlovers]

17 minutes ago, Skipalongcassidy said:

How many dollars has Australia donated compared to the dollars donated by the USA?  Pretty much nothing.

Perhaps that's because Australia has more sense than the USA.

[thaibeachlovers]

7 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

Can you tell me a realistic ending that doesn't involve NATO ground/air forces getting involved yet gets victory for Ukraine? All that is happening now is prolonging the inevitable. 

100% agree.

That is likely what Zelenski is attempting to do in his current "charm" tour of the US.

He probably knows that if he negotiates now, having said he will never do so, he is done as the "leader", and he has to know he can't win without more direct involvement by other countries. IMO he has to get that direct support or see the financial aid drying up as other countries go broke due to the current financial crisis ( assuming they are not already broke and having to borrow money to give to Ukraine ).

[thaibeachlovers]

9 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

It must be easy to dismiss those who disagree with you so cavalierly. But believe it or not, it IS possible to both hope Russia loses AND not support further funding this conflict.  A little nuance goes a long way.

As usual, those with nothing to say attack other posters, trying to cancel opposing viewpoints by making those that don't agree with them go away.

[thaibeachlovers]

9 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

...and here we go!   "b-b-but Trump...."

...has nothing to do with the war in Ukraine.  Biden flushing 120 billion dollars plus down the drain while his own cities are in chaos is criminal.

Agree 100%. Trump really lives in some people's heads, as they just can't stop bringing him up, even when the thread has nothing to do with him.

[Chomper Higgot]

3 hours ago, Thorgal said:

The ones that Fauci can't bring into the US...

Full on trollIng.

 

A Putin shill.

[Chomper Higgot]

51 minutes ago, IAMHERE said:

How much in 'aid' does Zelenski and his buddies syphon off?

What like stashing shoulder launched anti tank missiles in their garage?

 

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

26 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Agree 100%. Trump really lives in some people's heads, as they just can't stop bringing him up, even when the thread has nothing to do with him.

Thankfully not.

 

[Danderman123]

22 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

Why not just set the money on fire? At least it would keep a homeless person warm for a couple of hours.

It is insane to keep throwing money at this conflict when there is no actual exit strategy. If the Europeans are so worried, let THEM foot the bill.

There is an exit strategy: Russia loses.

[Danderman123]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

100% agree.

That is likely what Zelenski is attempting to do in his current "charm" tour of the US.

He probably knows that if he negotiates now, having said he will never do so, he is done as the "leader", and he has to know he can't win without more direct involvement by other countries. IMO he has to get that direct support or see the financial aid drying up as other countries go broke due to the current financial crisis ( assuming they are not already broke and having to borrow money to give to Ukraine ).

Would you negotiate with Hitler (back in the day) if Germany invaded your country?

[ozimoron]

4 hours ago, Thorgal said:

Biolabs.

You mean laboratories conducting regular biological research like every country in the world does. You have no evidence that WMD was manufactured or researched at these laboratories. Follow the white rabbit.