Not $33B to Ukraine, $40B- Who benefits?

[Donald H]

Every day Russia continues this war losing men and equipment American benefits.

I'm good with it.

That's the key point. America is good with it.

"America First" doesn't mean we pull our heads and limbs in like a turtle and ignore the rest of the world, it just means we should take care of our big problems first.

You're not understanding that defeating Russia is the biggest problem America ever had and has. (barring the defeat of China which is not currently on the table yet)
There's more money been spent on the Ukraine than would be needed to set up every illegal immigrant and their families, in a three bedroom home in Texas. Complete with two cats in the yard!

This war is the most important fight America will ever have! For America to not win this time would only make it much harder to win later.

There is no possibility of either America or Russia accepting a clear loss.

Peace will have to be found on conditions that can be politically spun by both sides as satisfactory.

Just be aware that no 'clear' win or no 'clear' loss is available.

 

[22lcidw]

That's the key point. America is good with it.

You're not understanding that defeating Russia is the biggest problem America ever had and has. (barring the defeat of China which is not currently on the table yet)
There's more money been spent on the Ukraine than would be needed to set up every illegal immigrant and their families, in a three bedroom home in Texas. Complete with two cats in the yard!

This war is the most important fight America will ever have! For America to not win this time would only make it much harder to win later.

There is no possibility of either America or Russia accepting a clear loss.

Peace will have to be found on conditions that can be politically spun by both sides as satisfactory.

Just be aware that no 'clear' win or no 'clear' loss is available.

Progs were disemboweling Repubs for wars we have had in recent decades. We grew tired of the people elected with their own motives. They still do. Now you are war lovers. Wasting over 50 billion now supposedly for Ukraine. Most likely payoffs are going on in a nation that is shady. Plus they are white. White supremacists you know.

 

[eagle1462010]

Lol. Are fucking nuts?

MAD principle Moonbat

 

[gipper]

MAD principle Moonbat

Yeah let’s keep provoking Russia and HOPE they don’t nuke us.

Are you fuvking nuts?

 

[sartre play]

This is about not expanding Comumust rule, Ukraine & then Tiwan.

 

[gipper]

This is about not expanding Comumust rule, Ukraine & then Tiwan.

What?

 

[eagle1462010]

Yeah let’s keep provoking Russia and HOPE they don’t nuke us.

Are you fuvking nuts?

You STFU too.

70 years idiots keep fear mongering MAD

 

[Donald H]

Agreed. Now with Finland joining NATO, the western elite are pushing Russia into a corner. Like a wild animal, they will likely respond. Do they attack Finland as they did Ukraine?

I doubt Russia is going to accept these continued provocations.

Another one or two countries joining Nato is not a valid concern to Russia. Russia has no interest in attacking any Nato country and will only resort to a counterstrike if necessary. But I'm only guessing that Russia will prefer to not escalate any further. There's no reason why they would! Russia is up against a much superior force. Russia will only react to aggression, as is the current case, and will never again be an aggressor. (Russia will hold it's ground, backed up with nuclear weaons.)

The reason why I think that is because Nato's advancing on Russia's borders doesn't apply in the same way it has in the past. Fwiw, most strategists and tacticians are of this opinion.

If any Nato country attacks Russia directly, Russia will respond with conventional weapons if feeling secure that will suffice. But much more likely nuclear weapons because conventional weapons and warfare wouldn't suffice.

Therefore article 5 is no longer a threat to Russia. This conflict has assured that in that it doesn't make a bit of difference now whether the Ukraine was immediately allowed into Nato.

If Article 5 ever applies in the future, it will only be in that an aggression by one is an aggression by all.

Nobody should try to deny that is where the situation exists right now!

 

[Turtlesoup]

Biden Wanted $33B More For Ukraine. Congress Quickly Raised it to $40B. Who Benefits?

Tens of billions, soon to be much more, are flying out of U.S. coffers to Ukraine as Americans suffer, showing who runs the U.S. Government, and for whose benefit.

greenwald.substack.com

Who benefits? Let's just cut through the bullshit and cut to the chase.

America is supposed to benefit. That much money isn't being spent for altruistic reasons of saving the Ukraine. It's an investment in defeating Russia as what America sees as a step toward defeating China later. It's truly and literally a life or death struggle for both America and Russia. The two combatants in this war.

The propaganda hoax of the war being for the Ukraine can't be sold to anybody above a grade school level. There is far, far too much contradicting evidence from the brightest of war analysists for even moderately informed people to buy any longer.

This is the opening debating point without any watering down. This is the way it must be presented.
Greenwald only gets it wrong on saying that it's the MIC that's the benefactor.

America and Russia are at war.

Ukraine has their donation boxes set out for both pelosi and biden being their families.

 

[gipper]

STFU with your endless Fear mongering with Nukes

Here’s a great column for you in the neocon WSJ by a nutty neocon like you.

Let’s have a nuclear war. It’s FUN!

The U.S. Should Show It Can Win a Nuclear War​

Washington might study Cold War-era practices that had a major effect on Soviet policy making.​

Opinion | The U.S. Should Show It Can Win a Nuclear War

 

[Donald H]

Progs were disemboweling Repubs for wars we have had in recent decades. We grew tired of the people elected with their own motives. They still do. Now you are war lovers. Wasting over 50 billion now supposedly for Ukraine. Most likely payoffs are going on in a nation that is shady. Plus they are white. White supremacists you know.

You and your country's domestic politics are irrelevant on this thread. Spam somewhere else.

 

[gipper]

You STFU too.

70 years idiots keep fear mongering MAD

You know nothing. Please stop posting.

 

[Donald H]

Here’s a great column for you in the neocon WSJ by a nutty neocon like you.

Let’s have a nuclear war. It’s FUN!

The U.S. Should Show It Can Win a Nuclear War​

Washington might study Cold War-era practices that had a major effect on Soviet policy making.​

Opinion | The U.S. Should Show It Can Win a Nuclear War

Beware! The military mindset is of the opinion that MAD doesn't apply!

I learned that by taking part on a military forum in which senior officers, both active and retired were taking part. I disagreed and was quickly banned from the forum within less than a week!

I learned a very scary lesson and so I pass it on to those I feel are capable of understanding the gravity of the situation.

The only comfort after learning that lesson is in the fact that the minds of the politicians aren't in agreement for the most part.

 

[gipper]

Another one or two countries joining Nato is not a valid concern to Russia. Russia has no interest in attacking any Nato country and will only resort to a counterstrike if necessary. But I'm only guessing that Russia will prefer to not escalate any further. There's no reason why they would! Russia is up against a much superior force. Russia will only react to aggression, as is the current case, and will never again be an aggressor. (Russia will hold it's ground, backed up with nuclear weaons.)

The reason why I think that is because Nato's advancing on Russia's borders doesn't apply in the same way it has in the past. Fwiw, most strategists and tacticians are of this opinion.

If any Nato country attacks Russia directly, Russia will respond with conventional weapons if feeling secure that will suffice. But much more likely nuclear weapons because conventional weapons and warfare wouldn't suffice.

Therefore article 5 is no longer a threat to Russia. This conflict has assured that in that it doesn't make a bit of difference now whether the Ukraine was immediately allowed into Nato.

If Article 5 ever applies in the future, it will only be in that an aggression by one is an aggression by all.

Nobody should try to deny that is where the situation exists right now!

You may be right but as some of us know, wars are often caused by one or both sides misunderstanding the situation.

Russia invaded Ukraine because of their concern about it joining NATO, and of course Ukraine’s continued attacks in the Donbas and abandoning Minsk. Obviously Finland is a different situation, but it going NATO only further provokes Russia. With the west flooding the region with arms and ever heightening tensions, mistakes can happen and the SHTF.

 

[Donald H]

Agreed. Now with Finland joining NATO, the western elite are pushing Russia into a corner. Like a wild animal, they will likely respond. Do they attack Finland as they did Ukraine?

I doubt Russia is going to accept these continued provocations.

I can only agree that Russia could use Nato expansion for an excuse for world war.
But no longer a concern for Russia.
Article 5 has served it's purpose but will no more.

But it's usefulness can be capitalized upon by Russia in that Russia can proclaim that an aggression by one is an aggression by all.

Fwiw, we know that situation already exists.

 

[gipper]

Beware! The military mindset is of the opinion that MAD doesn't apply!

I learned that by taking part on a military forum in which senior officers, both active and retired were taking part. I disagreed and was quickly banned from the forum within less than a week!

I learned a very scary lesson and so I pass it on to those I feel are capable of understanding the gravity of the situation.

The only comfort after learning that lesson is in the fact that the minds of the politicians aren't in agreement for the most part.

Yes this is a frightening mindset. However I’m skeptical our political class has the ability to control it. Particularly with a potus who has supported every war these past 50 years and now has lost his mind.

 

[gipper]

You STFU too.

70 years idiots keep fear mongering MAD

Since when did you become a Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi supporter? You are very confused.

 

[eagle1462010]

Here’s a great column for you in the neocon WSJ by a nutty neocon like you.

Let’s have a nuclear war. It’s FUN!

The U.S. Should Show It Can Win a Nuclear War​

Washington might study Cold War-era practices that had a major effect on Soviet policy making.​

Opinion | The U.S. Should Show It Can Win a Nuclear War

Never said its winnable idiot. Tired of you clowns Fear Mongering over it. I served during the cold War. Heard it all, so STFU

 

[eagle1462010]

Since when did you become a Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi supporter? You are very confused.

Im not either Moonbat. I dont trust Putin. Period. Hes x KGB and wants land. That is what he is and so Im against him
Not to mentiin BRICS is now back dooring us with China. I understand my enemies

I also dont care for Brandon and Piglosi.

If Putin wants to engage us he knows where we live. He threatens Nukes because he is scared if us. He cant win against us conventionally.

 

[Donald H]

You may be right but as some of us know, wars are often caused by one or both sides misunderstanding the situation.

Russia invaded Ukraine because of their concern about it joining NATO,

Is that true? Or is it only true in that the implications were true?
Is the truth more likely that the Ukraine was in the process of starting a war in the Donbass, aided and financed by the US?

and of course Ukraine’s continued attacks in the Donbas and abandoning Minsk. Obviously Finland is a different situation, but it going NATO only further provokes Russia. With the west flooding the region with arms and ever heightening tensions, mistakes can happen and the SHTF.

Yes, and the MInsk agreement violations by the Ukraine.

Expert tacticians are of the opinion that more countries joining Nato is irrelevant to Russia. I'll leave it to you to search that out, as to their reasons why.

Article 5 was only useful in that it was protection for member countries being safe from Russian aggression. For that purpose to exist it's necessary to believe that Russia will attempt an aggression against a Nato country. That day is gone, due to Russia surely understanding that they're up against a superior force.

When or if Russia resorts to nuclear weapons, it won't be with consideration for Nato!