Biden Highlights NATO's Strength and Commitment to Ukraine in Historic Speech

[CharlieKo]

1 hour ago, susanlea said:

They want Ukraine resources out of Russian control. They belong to the former ussr.

No, they want Russian resources, But to get them they need to beat Russia. For some reason the US thought Ukraine was strong enough to do that. 

[CharlieKo]

2 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Biden is still borrowing ($6.2 trillion) less than Trump( $8.8 trillion) and he reduced the deficit by $1.9 trillion. 

The deficit has not been reduces by $1.9 trillion. The US is projected to borrow more than $1 trillion every quarter of the financial year.

[susanlea]

4 minutes ago, CharlieKo said:

No, they want Russian resources, But to get them they need to beat Russia. For some reason the US thought Ukraine was strong enough to do that. 

Achieve both. Weaken Russian army and get resources.

[Hanaguma]

3 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Biden is still borrowing ($6.2 trillion) less than Trump( $8.8 trillion) and he reduced the deficit by $1.9 trillion. 

A disingenuous answer. If you take out the covid deficits for both men, Trump's 3 deficits were all below one trillion- 0.7, 0.8, and 0.9.  Biden's were 1.4, 1,7, and 1.2 trillion so far this year. 

 

He didn't reduce the deficit at all. He simply stopped the ridiculous overspending during covid. 

[susanlea]

Just now, Hanaguma said:

A disingenuous answer. If you take out the covid deficits for both men, Trump's 3 deficits were all below one trillion- 0.7, 0.8, and 0.9.  Biden's were 1.4, 1,7, and 1.2 trillion so far this year. 

 

He didn't reduce the deficit at all. He simply stopped the ridiculous overspending during covid. 

Don't expect the left to be fair.

[Eric Loh]

5 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

A disingenuous answer. If you take out the covid deficits for both men, Trump's 3 deficits were all below one trillion- 0.7, 0.8, and 0.9.  Biden's were 1.4, 1,7, and 1.2 trillion so far this year. 

 

He didn't reduce the deficit at all. He simply stopped the ridiculous overspending during covid. 

Exclude covid bills, the borrowing figures are Trump $4.8 trillion and Biden $2.2 trillion during their respective 4 years and 3 years 5 months in office. 

 

He reduce the deficit by maintaining fiscal responsibilities. One item like covid spending not possible to reduce $1.9 trillion deficit. Use your head. 

[Hanaguma]

5 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Exclude covid bills, the borrowing figures are Trump $4.8 trillion and Biden $2.2 trillion during their respective 4 years and 3 years 5 months in office. 

 

He reduce the deficit by maintaining fiscal responsibilities. One item like covid spending not possible to reduce $1.9 trillion deficit. Use your head. 

Not according to the Treasury Department homepage...

 

https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/national-deficit/#us-deficit-by-year

 

Trump's total for 2017-19 was 2.43 trillion.

Biden from 2022-23 was 3.08 trillion. Plus this year is 1.2 trillion and counting. He is still burning through money at a stupid rate. Might hit 2 trillion for the year in 2024.

[Eric Loh]

1 minute ago, Hanaguma said:

Not according to the Treasury Department homepage...

 

https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/national-deficit/#us-deficit-by-year

 

Trump's total for 2017-19 was 2.43 trillion.

Biden from 2022-23 was 3.08 trillion. Plus this year is 1.2 trillion and counting. He is still burning through money at a stupid rate. Might hit 2 trillion for the year in 2024.

I was refering to borrowings that you implied in your earlier post. 

[candide]

3 hours ago, sqwakvfr said:

Not a Trump voter or supporter but "look at our economy"??? He has done an extraordinary job or his people have done an extraordrinary job in pushing things that the average American does not prioritize.  For example I went to Hertz at LAX in September 2023 and the agent kept pushing an EV.  I declined and took a compact gas powered car.  Now Hertz is selling EV's at steep discounts.  It looks like the key word in the Biden Presidency is "disconnected" with many Americans.  This election like 2020 looks to be choice of "the lesser of two evils".  If Joe is still upright on election day he might still win. 

Is it better to let China dominate the EV market, et let U.S. manufacturers stuck with an old technology? To the point that, one day, Chinese manufacturers will have reached such a level of economies of scale that it will be impossible to compete against them?

[candide]

3 hours ago, CharlieKo said:

 

Indeed as Linsey Graham has said, It's a cheap war for the USA. As Ukraine is willing to fight to the last man. So America doesn't have to spill it's own blood. The US is Morally Bankrupt.

 

This isn't about helping a country defend itself! This is a Proxy war where the US can fight Russia Hands off.  

Sure! It's not Putin who is morally bankrupt, but the U.S.! 🤣

[candide]

2 hours ago, CharlieKo said:

 

That is the Narrative. But it's all about the US/Nato expanding Nato and placing nukes along the Russian borders. So it's a lot more than coming to the aid of an invaded country. Besides, apart from the air defence systems provided to Ukraine most of the weapons the west gave Ukraine have been old and  largely useless against Russian armaments. Not to mention Ukraine now don't have enough men to even defend Ukraine. They are losing.

  

More B.S. Russian propaganda from you!

 

The U.S. did not put any nukes near the Russian border. Nukes are in the same places as during the cold war.

 

https://www.cfr.org/in-brief/nuclear-weapons-europe-mapping-us-and-russian-deployments

[riclag]

3 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

The scary thing is that Biden even drags the teleprompter to private fundraisers, held in private homes. He has it set up literally in the living room of a rich donor and then reads it to those attending.  Afterwards, takes off without interacting with or talking to the attendees.  I think a lot of the donor class are going to stay on the sidelines.

Thats correct!

 Let biden & his dishonest allies , in the media & congress be all that they can be! The hole they dig gets deeper.
I had to google that claim .

 

https://www.vox.com/politics/359431/biden-step-down-lbj-1968-heather-cox-richardson

[candide]

1 hour ago, Hanaguma said:

A disingenuous answer. If you take out the covid deficits for both men, Trump's 3 deficits were all below one trillion- 0.7, 0.8, and 0.9.  Biden's were 1.4, 1,7, and 1.2 trillion so far this year. 

 

He didn't reduce the deficit at all. He simply stopped the ridiculous overspending during covid. 

At which date do you consider the effect of the Covid crisis stopped. On which economic analysis is it based?

[riclag]

6 minutes ago, riclag said:

Thats correct!

 Let biden & his dishonest allies , in the media & congress be all that they can be! The hole they dig gets deeper.
I had to google that claim .

 

https://www.vox.com/politics/359431/biden-step-down-lbj-1968-heather-cox-richardson

At this point ,everyone is watching 

his performance for screw ups, similar to going to a hockey game waiting for a fight! biden will bow out and his sycophants will pivot to their new 

dem star! 

imop

[CharlieKo]

21 minutes ago, candide said:

More B.S. Russian propaganda from you!

I am not saying the US has placed nukes along the Russian border. I am saying that is what they want to do!  

[Hanaguma]

23 minutes ago, candide said:

At which date do you consider the effect of the Covid crisis stopped. On which economic analysis is it based?

The year the extra spending packages ceased. Basically, 2020 for Trump and 2021 for Biden.  You clearly see the spike in the spending for those two years. Then afterwards, Biden kept the tragic trajectory moving upwards in 2022 and 2023, and even more in 2024. 

[candide]

13 minutes ago, CharlieKo said:

I am not saying the US has placed nukes along the Russian border. I am saying that is what they want to do!  

If they want that, why haven't they done it yet? And is the location so important?

 

Actually, they already are (I guess It's the same for UK and France), thanks to nuclear subs, which are much more dangerous as their location is not known.

Edited July 10 by candide

[candide]

4 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

The year the extra spending packages ceased. Basically, 2020 for Trump and 2021 for Biden.  You clearly see the spike in the spending for those two years. Then afterwards, Biden kept the tragic trajectory moving upwards in 2022 and 2023, and even more in 2024. 

In which textbook or report is it written that the effect of an economic crisis stops that early?

[CharlieKo]

2 minutes ago, candide said:

If they want that, why haven't they done it yet? And is the location so important.

 

Just the small matter of Ukraine can't defeat Russia, and is not yet a member of Nato. 

Edited July 10 by CharlieKo

[candide]

1 minute ago, CharlieKo said:

 

Just the small matter of Ukraine can't defeat Russia, and is not yet a member of Nato. 

It doesn't make any sense. Why wait for Ukraine? NATO has already several borders with Russia, or very close to Russia. If distance is so important, why not start by putting them closer, in Poland and Romania?

 

And, as I wrote before, they already have nuclear subs near Russia and they don't really need to put nukes at Russia's border.

[Keep Right]

They must have pumped old sleepy Joe with some good uppers to make this speech. Kamala is waiting in the wings until they put out sleepy to pasture.

[Purdey]

I think his NATO speech could prove important in rallying member countries. Most people look at Russia having to cross Europe before attacking the USA. However, Russia, at its closest, is just 53 miles from the USA (see any map) and there are risks to the USA when Canada, a NATO member, has refused to increase military spending. If the USA withdraws from NATO later, it could face a Russian invasion on its northern flank.

Then again, maybe overthinking this.

[Hanaguma]

51 minutes ago, Purdey said:

I think his NATO speech could prove important in rallying member countries. Most people look at Russia having to cross Europe before attacking the USA. However, Russia, at its closest, is just 53 miles from the USA (see any map) and there are risks to the USA when Canada, a NATO member, has refused to increase military spending. If the USA withdraws from NATO later, it could face a Russian invasion on its northern flank.

Then again, maybe overthinking this.

Trudeau is a goddam embarrassment.  Way too concerned with DEI and not enough with his country.

[RayC]

5 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Did he mention how much it was going to cost the taxpayers in those countries? If they can afford expensive tactical air defense systems for a country they have no treaty obligations to, why are their citizens doing so badly for lack of government funds?

 

The economic cost of WW2 was huge. It wrecked the economies of Europe. There was rationing of food in many countries long after hostilities ended. Was all that hardship worth it? Undoubtedly yes given the alternative. The same is true today wrt Ukraine.

[RayC]

4 hours ago, susanlea said:

They want Ukraine resources out of Russian control. They belong to the former ussr.

 

The USSR no longer exists. Ukraine became a sovereign nation in 1991. Her resources are her own.

[CharlieKo]

1 hour ago, Purdey said:

I think his NATO speech could prove important in rallying member countries. Most people look at Russia having to cross Europe before attacking the USA. However, Russia, at its closest, is just 53 miles from the USA (see any map) and there are risks to the USA when Canada, a NATO member, has refused to increase military spending. If the USA withdraws from NATO later, it could face a Russian invasion on its northern flank.

Then again, maybe overthinking this.

 

Russia won't be invading the US from any flank. LOL

 

If it really came to an attack on the US which is highly unlikely. It would be with missiles.  

[CharlieKo]

3 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

The USSR no longer exists. Ukraine became a sovereign nation in 1991. Her resources are her own.

 

 Actually Blackrock has bought a lot of Ukrainian land!

[Hummin]

7 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

 

 

Supporting democracy is a fine idea, but I wonder why NATO is supporting Ukraine? 

Valuable resources for the free world

[Hummin]

5 hours ago, bendejo said:

Biden Highlights NATO's Strength and Commitment to Ukraine in Historic Speech

 

To find out what was wrong with the speech see Fox channel.

 

cut and paste out of context? 

[candide]

14 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

The USSR no longer exists. Ukraine became a sovereign nation in 1991. Her resources are her own.

And Russia's declaration of independence before that has been the main cause of the dissolution of the Soviet Union.