Rand Paul: Withdraw Ukraine money if you want to avoid shutdown

[KhunLA]

46 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Even if the rest of the world played along, isolationism leads to decline.  North Korea is an obvious example, but there are no wealthy nations that are isolationist, unless you count special case minnows like Vatican City or Monaco.

Don't have to be wealthy, just able to feed & energize yourself, which few countries can.  Especially the feed part. 

 

Not a problem for the USA.  Along with can obviously defend itself.

[Danderman123]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

There was a bit more to it than "the US withdrew to its borders", but perhaps you are unaware of the reasons.

Accusing anyone that disagrees with funding a proxy war with Ukrainians paying the ultimate price as Putin lovers is IMO the usual response of those that have no argument to support the death of other people in a conflict they will never take part in.

and yet, you are willing to let Putin butcher Ukrainians unimpeded.

 

US money goes to saving Ukrainian lives.

 

This is not a difficult concept to understand.

[Danderman123]

1 minute ago, KhunLA said:

Don't have to be wealthy, just able to feed & energize yourself, which few countries can.  Especially the feed part. 

 

Not a problem for the USA.  Along with can obviously defend itself.

Dazzlingly naive.

[heybruce]

40 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Don't have to be wealthy, just able to feed & energize yourself, which few countries can.  Especially the feed part. 

 

Not a problem for the USA.  Along with can obviously defend itself.

Do a little research on Japan's Tokugawa shogunate period and China's Edict of Haijin.  Both were led to periods of enforce isolation, neither ended well.

 

Or simply give a modern example of a prosperous nation that isolates itself from the world and reality.

[thaibeachlovers]

49 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

and yet, you are willing to let Putin butcher Ukrainians unimpeded.

 

US money goes to saving Ukrainian lives.

 

This is not a difficult concept to understand.

and yet, you are willing to let Putin butcher Ukrainians unimpeded.

Prove that.

 

Had they negotiated likely no lives lost, Ukraine would not be wrecked and the west would not be pouring money into an IMO unwinnable war. In the end Ukraine will, IMO, be forced to negotiate when western countries are no longer going to keep pouring the money in. Looks like the US is getting a bit tired of it.

So what will they have gained, other than a lot of weeping wives and children, and a wrecked country?

 

However, keep thinking Ukraine can win, and keep working to pay tax to send there by all means.

[ozimoron]

Rand Paul is a traitorous nazi loving scum.

[Danderman123]

18 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

and yet, you are willing to let Putin butcher Ukrainians unimpeded.

Prove that.

 

Had they negotiated likely no lives lost, Ukraine would not be wrecked and the west would not be pouring money into an IMO unwinnable war. In the end Ukraine will, IMO, be forced to negotiate when western countries are no longer going to keep pouring the money in. Looks like the US is getting a bit tired of it.

So what will they have gained, other than a lot of weeping wives and children, and a wrecked country?

 

However, keep thinking Ukraine can win, and keep working to pay tax to send there by all means.

do you think Poland should have negotiated with Hitler before Germany invaded?

 

Just like when Chamberlain negotiated with Hitler in Munich, only to see Hitler quickly attack another country, appeasement by Ukraine would have led to further attacks by Putin.

 

Appeasement doesn't work again madmen. You could ask Prigozhen, except Putin killed him.

 

Edited September 30, 2023 by Danderman123

[KhunLA]

41 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Do a little research on Japan's Tokugawa shogunate period and China's Edict of Haijin.  Both were led to periods of enforce isolation, neither ended well.

 

Or simply give a modern example of a prosperous nation that isolates itself from the world and reality.

21st Century ... and who said anything about isolation?   Just stop giving away what you don't have or can provide for your own.

 

Spend those trillions an USA citizens, not foreign countries.  After all, it is 'their money'.

[Chomper Higgot]

14 hours ago, KhunLA said:

Stated more than a few times, I would cut all foreign aid, and bring all military back to US soil & waters.  Stop playing world police force & corporate security.  Billion $$$ can pay for their own security.

 

31+ Trillion $$$ debt, can't pay own bills, and giving sh!t away.

 

Can't fix stupid

Maybe giving out over a &Trillion in tax breaks to the hyper wealthy wasn’t such a good idea after-all.

 

Isolationism never has been and always comes with extreme long term costs.

 

 

[heybruce]

58 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

and yet, you are willing to let Putin butcher Ukrainians unimpeded.

Prove that.

 

Had they negotiated likely no lives lost, Ukraine would not be wrecked and the west would not be pouring money into an IMO unwinnable war. In the end Ukraine will, IMO, be forced to negotiate when western countries are no longer going to keep pouring the money in. Looks like the US is getting a bit tired of it.

So what will they have gained, other than a lot of weeping wives and children, and a wrecked country?

 

However, keep thinking Ukraine can win, and keep working to pay tax to send there by all means.

When was Ukraine supposed to negotiate?  When Putin was claiming Russia wouldn't invade, or after?

[heybruce]

30 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

21st Century ... and who said anything about isolation?   Just stop giving away what you don't have or can provide for your own.

 

Spend those trillions an USA citizens, not foreign countries.  After all, it is 'their money'.

Do you think we should have done that after WW II when Stalin was convinced that Soviet-style communism was destined to rule the world and Europe was exhausted and largely helpless?

[KhunLA]

21 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Do you think we should have done that after WW II when Stalin was convinced that Soviet-style communism was destined to rule the world and Europe was exhausted and largely helpless?

More what ifs ... how about living in the now.

 

Pre 2000, debt was 5T .... thanks to corrupt politicians

... unnecessary gulf wars

... unnecessary broker/bank bail outs

... middle east conflicts

... invade & occupy sovereign countries for NO reason

... now silly UA/RU conflict.

 

None benefitting the USA.

 

debt @ 31T and still want to give away, what they don't have.

 

When you want to talk about the present, how we got here (foreign aid) and stop with past or future what if BS, let me know.

 

Have a nice day

Edited September 30, 2023 by KhunLA

[FruitPudding]

1 hour ago, ozimoron said:

Rand Paul is a traitorous nazi loving scum.

Hate speech

[ozimoron]

Just now, FruitPudding said:

Hate speech

555

[Hanaguma]

29 minutes ago, heybruce said:

When was Ukraine supposed to negotiate?  When Putin was claiming Russia wouldn't invade, or after?

How about....now?  Today?  

 

There is a false dichotomy at work here that shows up constantly in discussions about Ukraine, and I am not sure why. Apparently, there are only two positions; support Ukraine without limit, or Putin's puppet.

 

Believe it or not, there are more ways to see the situation. I don't think anyone is seriously advocating 1930s style isolation. The US is not going to drop out of NATO, the Five Eyes, various treaties with other nations, etc.  But there does need to be some open discussion of exactly how much and for how long the US will support Ukraine. Also what the Ukraine needs to do in order to keep the money flowing.  

 

At the moment, the US has spent $1,000 per American family on Ukraine.  How much is enough? 

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, KhunLA said:

More what ifs ... how about living in the now.

 

Pre 2000, debt was 5T .... thanks to corrupt politicians

... unnecessary gulf wars

... unnecessary broker/bank bail outs

... middle east conflicts

... invade & occupy sovereign countries for NO reason

... now silly UA/RU conflict.

 

None benefitting the USA.

 

debt @ 31T and still want to give away, what they don't have.

 

When you want to talk about the present, how we got here (foreign aid) and stop with past or future what if BS, let me know.

 

Have a nice day

I see.  Move forward, don't live in the past, repeat the same mistakes over and over.

 

Have a nice day.

[Danderman123]

3 hours ago, KhunLA said:

More what ifs ... how about living in the now.

 

Pre 2000, debt was 5T .... thanks to corrupt politicians

... unnecessary gulf wars

... unnecessary broker/bank bail outs

... middle east conflicts

... invade & occupy sovereign countries for NO reason

... now silly UA/RU conflict.

 

None benefitting the USA.

 

debt @ 31T and still want to give away, what they don't have.

 

When you want to talk about the present, how we got here (foreign aid) and stop with past or future what if BS, let me know.

 

Have a nice day

Foreign aid is a tiny part of the budget.

 

Tax cuts for the wealthy are what caused a big chunk of the deficit. If you worry about debt, increasing taxes on the wealthy should be your #1 priority.

[Danderman123]

3 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

How about....now?  Today?  

 

There is a false dichotomy at work here that shows up constantly in discussions about Ukraine, and I am not sure why. Apparently, there are only two positions; support Ukraine without limit, or Putin's puppet.

 

Believe it or not, there are more ways to see the situation. I don't think anyone is seriously advocating 1930s style isolation. The US is not going to drop out of NATO, the Five Eyes, various treaties with other nations, etc.  But there does need to be some open discussion of exactly how much and for how long the US will support Ukraine. Also what the Ukraine needs to do in order to keep the money flowing.  

 

At the moment, the US has spent $1,000 per American family on Ukraine.  How much is enough? 

Most of the money spent on Ukraine was on surplus equipment, much destined for scrap, and the money isn't real, it's a bookkeeping entry.

[jvs]

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

and yet, you are willing to let Putin butcher Ukrainians unimpeded.

Prove that.

 

Had they negotiated likely no lives lost, Ukraine would not be wrecked and the west would not be pouring money into an IMO unwinnable war. In the end Ukraine will, IMO, be forced to negotiate when western countries are no longer going to keep pouring the money in. Looks like the US is getting a bit tired of it.

So what will they have gained, other than a lot of weeping wives and children, and a wrecked country?

 

However, keep thinking Ukraine can win, and keep working to pay tax to send there by all means.

You keep coming up with the same old arguments where ever Ukraine is mentioned.

Maybe time to read up and stop being a lapdog for putin?

Your arguments have been debunked several times but you just a very naive or not willing to see how it is going now at the front.

 

[KhunLA]

25 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Foreign aid is a tiny part of the budget.

 

Tax cuts for the wealthy are what caused a big chunk of the deficit. If you worry about debt, increasing taxes on the wealthy should be your #1 priority.

They already pay an unfair percentage of income, and account for the majority of income tax.

 

[Hanaguma]

20 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Most of the money spent on Ukraine was on surplus equipment, much destined for scrap, and the money isn't real, it's a bookkeeping entry.

Ah, the money isnt real because we are sending scrap to Ukraine.  Is that how to support an ally?

 

Not to mention the billions of dollars that go to keep the Ukranian government afloat, pay for their staff.

 

Pull the other leg, it has bells on.

[Danderman123]

1 minute ago, KhunLA said:

They already pay an unfair percentage of income, and account for the majority of income tax.

 

During the Eisenhower administration, the marginal tax rate was 90%, and there were no deficits.

 

Reagan started cutting taxes on the wealthy, and the result was a big deficit. Clinton increased taxes on the wealthy and balanced the budget.

 

See a pattern here?

[KhunLA]

3 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

At the moment, the US has spent $1,000 per American family on Ukraine.  How much is enough? 

Yes, and most of those taxpayer's, couldn't scrap up $1000 if they themselves needed it in an emergency:

 

source

[Danderman123]

2 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Ah, the money isnt real because we are sending scrap to Ukraine.  Is that how to support an ally?

 

Not to mention the billions of dollars that go to keep the Ukranian government afloat, pay for their staff.

 

Pull the other leg, it has bells on.

Your suggestion is to let Putin win?

[KhunLA]

11 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

See a pattern here?

No, I don't.  I guess you missed borrowing to finance the Gulf wars, 10 ish year, and bank/market bailout. Thank you Bush & Obama.

 

5T to 20T $$$$, I don't thing the tax cuts would have made up the amount.

 

Sending with no way to pay.

Maybe you missed this:

 

Edited September 30, 2023 by KhunLA

[billd766]

3 hours ago, FruitPudding said:

Hate speech

You don't like the truth?

[Nick Carter icp]

9 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

During the Eisenhower administration, the marginal tax rate was 90%, and there were no deficits.

 

Reagan started cutting taxes on the wealthy, and the result was a big deficit. Clinton increased taxes on the wealthy and balanced the budget.

 

See a pattern here?

If Thailand introduces a 90 % tax on all people living in Thailand , would you happily give the Thai Government  90 % of your income ?

[Danderman123]

1 minute ago, KhunLA said:

No, I don't.  I guess you missed borrowing to finance the Gulf wars, 10 ish year, and bank/market bailout. Thank you Bush & Obama.

 

Sending with no way to pay.

Maybe you missed this:

 

You are partially correct. Bush did a tax cut for the wealthy while starting 2 wars. That blew up the deficit.

 

The TARP money was repaid by the banks.

[Hanaguma]

11 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Your suggestion is to let Putin win?

Depends on what you mean by "win". Give him a couple chunks of eastern Ukraine? Sure, no problem, as long as guarantees are put in place to recognize the terrirorial integrity of the remainder. 

 

The more the west faffs about, the more he will try to go for the big win, and conquer the entire country.

 

How do you see a "win" for Ukraine?

[Danderman123]

1 minute ago, Nick Carter icp said:

If Thailand introduces a 90 % tax on all people living in Thailand , would you happily give the Thai Government  90 % of your income ?

You don't seem to understand what a marginal tax rate is.