• IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    191
    arrow-down
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Ukraine United States is going to lose if Congress doesn’t send more aid

    The fact that everyone understands that the war in Ukraine is based on American backing means that it’s a proxy war between the US and Russia.

    • Melkath@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      128
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      3 months ago

      $773 billion dollars last year spent on fighting “proxy” wars around the world (and if you count the spying, domestically).

      The only one that America has actual moral footing to get behind is the only one we are pulling punches on.

      • CountVon@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        47
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        Hardly the first time. I’d argue the US made the same mistake in Afghanistan in 2003, diverting resources to Iraq because Bush Jr. had such a hard-on for Saddam.

        • Melkath@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          40
          arrow-down
          21
          ·
          3 months ago

          100%

          With each passing day, Biden’s administration looks like the Bush administration’s bigger more right wing brother.

          Citizens United needs to be overturned. The Pentagon budget needs to be at least halved. We need the 2 party system to end.

          This will never happen if we keep voting for the lesser evil every 4 years.

          • Goldmage263@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            3 months ago

            I agree with the viewpoints, but many voted for the Russia supporting party, and noone else got enough support in the primaries. There needs to be massively increased primary involvement before a systemic change to move away from the two party system can be feasible. I’m a big fan of ranked choice voting myself, but what big party candidate is going to advocate for that in the current climate? I’m hoping changes can happen over the next decade as my generation and the one below get even more active.

            • Melkath@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              16
              ·
              3 months ago

              Republicans are corrupted spoiled fucks.

              Democrats are corrupted spoiled fucks.

              How do you think “massively increased involvement” will occur if we keep throwing our votes at these massively corrupt spoiled fucks?

              Peaceful abstaining. Quiet sit in. America on strike.

              That is the only possible way we have to cause the change we needed at least 50 years ago.

              • Goldmage263@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                I mean involvement of the voters themselves. I push a lot of my friends to just go vote, but they still won’t. If you figure out how to get people to actually want to fix the situation, let me know.

                • Melkath@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  I know that in America, currently, “peaceful protester” is an officially classified terrorist group. That was what Occupy Wallstreet resulted in.

                  I have no idea what Blue MAGA is even suggesting when they say “get more involved in government outside of election season”. The concept doesn’t exist.

                  I definitely still vote on measures.

                  When my choices are vote for Genocide and continued severe loss of privacy of freedom A or Genocide and continued severe loss of privacy of freedom B, all I can figure is vote disenfranchised. Won’t check the damn box.

                  Primary results where people did that have already gotten Biden change his half hour chit chat with Bibi from “your US taxpayer dollars are on the way. The weapons you are buying with those dollars are on the way” to “your US taxpayer dollars are on the way. The weapons you are buying with those dollars are on the way, try to go easier on the civilians in Gaza.”

                  If Biden suffers a shameful and embarrassing defeat, maybe the next Democrat will figure out the correct answer is “fuck you Bibi, you genocidal maniac. Israel is cut off, that money will now be invested into fixing the healthcare crisis in America, our military is moving humanitarian aid into Gaza, and if your genocidal asshats so much as point a gun in the general direction of our soldiers and the starving citizens of Gaza, you will enjoy our crosshairs.”

      • triplenadir@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        mm, delicious bait! 😋 go on then, which proxy war does the US have “actual moral footing” to get behind?

  • Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    127
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    3 months ago

    Yes, no shit. That was the outlook from day 1.

    The Russian Army is largely represented as a bunch of baffoons in the Western media, but it’s still one of the 3 largest armies in the world. Ukraine cannot hold their lines indefinitely, the only way to “win” against an opponent that has multiple times your materiel available is guerilla.

  • istanbullu@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    120
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    3 months ago

    It is a bad idea to trust and rely on Ameeica. Some Afgans learned this lesson in 2021, the same is happening to Ukraine now.

    • assassinatedbyCIA@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      3 months ago

      They so desperately want their own version of Putin in the US. Where they get to kill their political opponents when they like.

  • lemmytellyousomething@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    139
    arrow-down
    62
    ·
    3 months ago

    The free world loses when Russia wins.

    It’s pretty much an invitation to China to do the same in Taiwan and an invitation for Russia to start more wars in eastern Europe…

    Helping Ukraine costs money. Not helping Ukraine costs even more.

  • Alsjemenou@lemy.nl
    link
    fedilink
    Nederlands
    arrow-up
    100
    arrow-down
    25
    ·
    3 months ago

    People in this thread clearly don’t understand what the implications are. There is a very clear danger of war on the European continent that will involve NATO and by proxy the US. Aid for Ukraine is the absolute cheapest option. Europe is not going to just let Ukraine fall and will ramp up their involvement. We already have France willing to send troops.

    • LarkinDePark@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      3 months ago

      You don’t understand that the only danger of further war is again from US/NATO. Europe is going to let Ukraine fall because it has no choice. France is a laughing stock. Even what they threatened to send could do nothing.

      In the case of shells, the problem isn’t money, it’s lack of production capacity. Even the mighty USA, owner of the largest military-industrial complex in the world, can only produce 28,000 rounds of 155mm per month – less than 10pc of what Ukraine needs – and this with its factories on 24-hour operation.

      Comment from the Torygrapgh readership:

    • index@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      27
      ·
      3 months ago

      Aid for Ukraine is the absolute cheapest option

      One who consider a proxy war where thousand people die and a country get destroyed the “cheapest option” tells you how much they are in bad faith. For politicians your life is indeed cheap and something they can trash away for profits

      • Ebber@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        So no aid to Ukraine and show Russia that it can indeed start wars where thousands die and destroy countries, without negative consequences?

        • index@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          3 months ago

          As long as it doesn’t mess up with their business no government in the world care if russia starts a war. Where’s the aid to gaza as a genocide is happening at the hands of israel? War is a business and politicians wants more of it

        • Woozythebear@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          3 months ago

          Where are the negative consequences for America? Why can America invade any country it wants and kill hundreds of thousands of innocent women and children but for some reason when Russia does it we have to show them they aren’t allowed?

          Only America and its allies can start wars and commit genocides?

          • Ebber@lemmings.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            I didn’t condone the USA’s actions, and it’s clear from your comment that you assume I would. It’s clear to me who is the aggressor in this conflict between Ukraine and Russia, and it’s not Ukraine.

            Don’t let your disdain for one imperialist push you over to another.

          • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            3 months ago

            Classic whataboutism.

            Because the US does interventionism, fund far-right politicians, etc., Russia (and China) can do as such, and even more. At least the US doesn’t want to “regain it’s old lost territories”.

              • NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                In fairness it’s a solid criticism considering there’s two kinds of comparisons that aren’t made on equal footing. To argue U.S.'s kind of intervention is the same as the Russias, would be more appropriate to consider Russia’s pre 2014 involvement in Ukraine. If you want to compare full-scale military operations then ZILtoid makes a good point. We haven’t tried to annex another country in a long time.

      • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        This is a delicate situation. If a NATO country is sending troops to Ukraine, it will escalate the war into a full blown world war.

        We know what happened in both world wars, so there is no good answers here.

          • GreenSkree@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Generally, I’d agree with that sentiment. However, what path forward would provide the best way out of the situation and discourage further conflict in the region?

            When we look at the lead up to WW2, we see a build-up of tension by Germany and attempted appeasement by the other major powers in an effort to avoid another breakout of war in Europe, only a few decades after the first great war ravaged these nations.

            Notable events:

            • Remilitarization of the Rhineland (Mar 1936) – this was a clear power move and violation of the Treaty of Versailles that ended WW1. With no real reaction from the France/Britain, this was a clear indication to Hitler he could continue to push things much further.
            • Anschluss (Annexation of Austria, Mar 1938) - Germany was prepared to take Austria by force, but managed to do so with only the threat of violence. This was also against the Treaty of Versailles and also had no real reaction from the Allied powers.
            • Sudetenland conquest (Sept 1938) - Germany pressures Czechoslovakia for pieces of it’s territory that border Germany. British PM finally gets involved, allowing the exchange of territory for a promise of peace. This is the famous " Peace for our time declaration.
            • Annexation of territory from Lithuania (Mar 1939) - Lithuania pressed to give up territory under threat of war.
            • Czech/Slovokia split and occupation/control (Mar 1939) - Under further pressure and threat of invasion, Czechoslovakia split and both come under German control.
            • Invasion of Poland by Germany and USSR (Sept 1939) - First open conflict. France and Britain declare war on Germany, roughly a year after the “Peace for our time” negotiations/declaration that clearly made a difference!

            As you can see, in the build-up to WW2, the European powers that opposed German expansion sought alternatives. They even allowed Germany to push its weight around on its neighbors, taking territory from others, and consolidating power. By the time the great powers were forced into conflict by open war in Poland, they were no longer in a position to hope to control Germany at all, doubly so with their apparent new cooperation with the USSR.

            Knowing what happened, it’s easy to see that any intervention by France and/or Britain, whether it sparked violence or not, in the early days of German aggression would have almost certainly led to a less powerful Germany, perhaps one that could not have taken over most of Europe so easily.


            I think the key take away from all of this is that, modern nations that have a desire for conquest are a danger to all. They are not to be believed, they should not be appeased, they should not be rewarded. Any violence against free nations should be resisted, supported by all free nations, but without escalation to full-blown nuclear war.

            The danger of washing our hands of the conflict and saying something like, “Violence bad. End the war. They can have Ukraine/Donetsk/whatever.” is that Russia won’t stop there. They’ll get bigger, stronger, and move on to the next target when they’re ready.

            The horrible part about all of this is that the apparent best way to keep long-term violence down is to continue the fighting now. The longer the conflict continues, and the more humiliated Russia becomes, the less likely Russia will chose to do a similar invasion in the future.

            • index@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              3 months ago

              Generally, I’d agree with that sentiment. However, what path forward would provide the best way out of the situation and discourage further conflict in the region?

              Stopping the war industry and ceasing all sort of imperialistic activities, even on one side alone will put at end on most conflicts but every ruler is in for more wealth and power, they don’t want to stop. This does not mean that because someone is doing it everyone has to follow suit, it literally means that every corrupted politician and their government seek war.

              If there’s anything to be extrapolated from history is that ramping up for war and fueling authoritarian regimes brings you exactly war and dictatorships.

              Any violence against free nations should be resisted

              So do you agree that palestine should have the rights to defend themself against israel?

              The danger of washing our hands

              If there’s anyone washing their hands is politicians drinking champagne in dubai next to russian yachts. The same politicians that send people money to ukraine goverement.

              • GreenSkree@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                Stopping the war industry and ceasing all sort of imperialistic activities, even on one side alone will put at end on most conflicts but every ruler is in for more wealth and power, they don’t want to stop. This does not mean that because someone is doing it everyone has to follow suit, it literally means that every corrupted politician and their government seek war.

                I think this is overly naive and simplistic.

                So do you agree that palestine should have the rights to defend themself against israel?

                (I’m not as well versed in this conflict, but a few thoughts from my perspective)

                The situation and power dynamics are quite different there. I don’t have any easy answer unfortunately.

                • Palestine doesn’t have a conventional army or a means to fight Israel the same way Ukraine is fighting Russia.
                • Israel’s reaction and occupation of Gaza Strip is horrible.
                • Historically, Israel’s treatment of Palestinian people has been completely unacceptable.
                • Hamas’ actions have been awful, both historically and with the first attack in October where they started this conflict. Their attacks routinely target civilians, which is unacceptable.

                So, if there are people living in Palestine who want to fight the occupiers, that perspective makes sense to me. So, at the most basic level, yes – I think they should be able to defend themselves. However, Hamas historically seems prioritized only in hurting Israel, and their actions routinely hurt Palestine in a number of ways. Plus, supporting terrorist organizations (like Hamas) with arms/training/etc has worked out poorly for the US in the past.

                So, unfortunately, I think there are no “good guys” here (besides the civilians caught up in this who want peace). I think both Israel and Hamas steered into this conflict when alternative course of actions existed. Conflict between these groups has been ongoing for decades and has no good or simple solution.

          • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            3 months ago

            Yeah, but Russia invaded Ukraine. So what should be done now.

            If left to their own devices, Ukraine would be annexed to Russia and surrounding countries would be next. The casualties would probably be less here (not guaranteed) and the quality of life of the Ukrainians would drastically degrade.

            If NATO sends boots on the ground, then it becomes a full blown world war with warring countries having lots of nukes. The casualties are enormous with a potential doomsday scenario.

            Right now, NATO finance a proxy war. Ukrainians fight back and hard to shut out Russians. They need the tech and financing to do so. If they don’t have it, Russia takes over and we go back to the first scenario. Casualties are high.

            There is no good ending where Russia negotiate peace and return home. War fucking sucks, and there is no good answer.

            • index@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Yeah, but Russia invaded Ukraine. So what should be done now.

              What about putting sanction on china for providing russia weapons or on emirates and turkey for allowing russian to just chill there and bypass restrictions?

              If left to their own devices, Ukraine would be annexed to Russia and surrounding countries would be next.

              Where do you got this from? Is Israel planning to invade the whole middle east after they invaded gaza?

              the quality of life of the Ukrainians would drastically degrade.

              Would it actually? Ukraine turned into an authoritatian regime under martial law where no man between 18 and 60 can leave the country. There’s probably many brave ukranians fighting for freedom but it’s the ukranian government getting money and weapons.

              The casualties are already high and the country is getting destroyed, it’s just not happening in your garden

          • SUPAVILLAIN@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Anglo dominance over the world is why the world is ending. Y’all are fucking shit stewards of a planet.

      • Alsjemenou@lemy.nl
        link
        fedilink
        Nederlands
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I’m not talking about just money. Of course in current capitalist society we analyse through the lens of finances. But obviously the cost of war includes the loss of human life. And of course some people will manage to profit financially from war. This isn’t a revolutionary thought.

        What I mean is that due to the obligation of being a NATO member, there is no way around having to join war in the EU. Actual boots on the ground, full blown, war machine goes choo-choo war. That costs many hundreds or even thousands of American lives. And yes, billions a day.

        If you don’t want that, then having Putin lose in Ukraine in key. It’s key because it will diminish his political backing in Russia.

        • index@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          That costs many hundreds or even thousands of American lives.

          Better dispose of the ukrainians instead

  • Yor [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Without the support of Congress, it will be “difficult” for Ukraine to win, “even to stay,” Zelenskyy said in a video meeting with fundraising supporters, including Mark Hamill and billionaire Richard Branson.

    Nightmare blunt rotation

    Anyway, wow! You mean every time Russia was said to be slowing down or taking unsustainable levels of casualties wasn’t entirely true? Wow! surprised-pika

  • Zuzak [fae/faer, she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    70
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    3 months ago

    NATO is seeking to take control of decision-making powers on future aid packages — normally led by the US — in an effort to limit the impact of a potential second Donald Trump presidency on the ongoing conflict.

    This is wild. It’s bad enough that the US president has the power to start wars wherever he wants with no congressional approval. But now they’re trying to make it so that the only people with the authority to withdraw from a conflict are unelected NATO officials accountable to no one.

    Dronies will support this, because they love endless war across the globe and want to remove any potential for popular support to achieve peace.

  • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    76
    arrow-down
    32
    ·
    3 months ago

    I was wondering how the media was going to explain the collapse in Ukraine when it finally becomes impossible to hide it, and now we know. The whole thing is going to be blamed on republicans holding up money in congress, as if pouring another 61 billion after all the untold billions that were already poured into this was going to make any difference. The fact that people genuinely believe this is frankly depressing. It shows just how utterly credulous and mentally deficient western public is.

  • unreasonabro@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    nice job america, now in addition to everything else, you’ve lost a war you weren’t even fighting in. Fuck yeah!

    • rbesfe@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      3 months ago

      Are you implying Ukraine has lost the war? That’s just not true, they still hold territory that according to Putin is part of Russia