Support for Ukraine is declining in the US

[Israfil]

59 minutes ago, D2sage said:

"US announces additional aid for Ukraine, including ammunition for Patriot air defence systems and Stingers" Wednesday, 31 May 2023, 21:43

Nothing is declining.

Putin is losing it. His nuke threats are empty.

The use of nuclear weapons would be a universally condemned. Countries around the world, even Russia's allies, would likely introduce to him some  severe sanctions that would devastate the Russian economy. Not to mention the immense humanitarian crisis. No more andrew tate wankers.

At this point, his nuke threats are to gain some sort of control to get  diplomatic negotiation.

The nuke card also let him stay in power in his bubble in Moscow.

US have done most to help ukraine. Without USA the world would probably not be a fun place to live in.

The point of the post was about public support, not the support of the government. 

[Hatfort]

19 hours ago, Blackhawk said:

Nonsense.

Finland won over Soviet Union three times. With much less support from west. And Finland was/is much smaller than Ukraine. And Soviet Union was much more powerful than Russia.

And Afghanistan won over Soviet Union without any help from west.

Ukraine will win.

The war between the Soviet Union and Finland during World War II ended in three months with the diplomatic way of the Moscow Peace Treaty, where Finland indeed ceded border areas to the Soviet Union.

Afghanistan won what? That was the cold war, the Soviet Union was obviously in, but it wasn’t an invasion like the current war. What happened was that the USA armed and trained the most radical Islamic fundamentalist men, the Mujahideen or Taliban, who then took power and destroyed any sign of advancement that was happening and now we don’t like because they don’t let girls go to school and destroyed the Twin Towers with two planes in New York in 2001. Brilliant! Those have taken power again, now that the US has decided to leave after 20 years of war with hundreds of thousands of victims.

My thoughts are that Ukraine struggles with the number of men, so just sending weapons may not be enough. On the other hand, Russia seems to be able to hold most of what they already have and may be able to slowly and effectively gain more land, or regain whatever bits they lose in next Ukrainian offensives. No other big country can risk getting directly involved. We'll see how it develops.

[Tanz]

9 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Just ask the Ukrainians if they are cool with that.

It's not like we are forcing Ukrainians to fight. If they want to surrender to the Russians they are free to do so.

Actually, I would be interested to see an entire country being able to vote if they want to go to war with Russia or not, I would suspect most of them do but at the great expense to the entire world. Again to what point does America and Western Europe stop before the world's government just say, you are on your own?  Zelenski has even asked America to send their troops to Ukraine, which I personally have a bigger problem with than funding them with noi budget in mind

8 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

   Is this because most of the eastern Ukraine is mostly Russian ethnic?

 

Prior to the whole war thing, I actually talked to many Ukrainians whether they think Ukraine should unite with Russia or not, a small minority thinks so but perhaps that number has probably gone down after getting invaded.  

If the country isn't divided in half, another solution is to give the Ukrainians a choice on how they want to stop the war.  They can vote and if 10% or whatever percent of Ukrainians are in favor of Russia then Russia gets 10% of Ukraine from the Russian border.  Putin has asked before invading to disarm all of the missiles that are pointing at Russia in eastern Ukraine.  

What would US do if China gave a bunch of missiles to Mexico at the US/Mexico Border? What if China's best excuse is, we aren't setting up bases at the US border, all we did is gave Mexico missiles because they asked them from us?  

 

Edited June 1, 2023 by Tanz

[EugeneTheSage]

On 5/29/2023 at 7:24 PM, Tobia said:

@Hardkill The Biden administration is perfectly aware that Ukraine is losing but they will keep funding it until the last ukrainian soldier is dead because prolonging the war servs US corporate interests extremely well.

Is a ukrainian defeat going to be somewhat embarassing for Biden? Yes a bit.

Does it matter? Absolutely not!  the US wins regardless of the outcome:

1) US weapons manifactures made hundreds of billions of dollars

2) NATO is expanding and european countries are purchasing american weapons

3) Europe is buying liquified gas from the US at 8 times the price of Russian gas

4) The lifeline between europe and russia (nordstream pipelines) has been bombed

5) Europe is de-industrializing and german industry is moving to the US

This war is a bargain for the US, the money is selfishly well spent and will bring back blood-stained returns several times greater than what was invested.

 

 

That's ridiculous, Ukraine is winning this war. In 2 days we took back that much territory around Bakhmut that russia captured for the last 2 months. The counteroffensive is bound to start.

That narrative of us military industries being the beneficiary is bullshit. Yes, they benefit, but the all enterprise of supporting Ukraine is not for it. It is to protect democratic values and to show other dictators what will happen with them if they invade someone else.

[Leo Gura]

19 hours ago, Tanz said:

Actually, I would be interested to see an entire country being able to vote if they want to go to war with Russia or not, I would suspect most of them do but at the great expense to the entire world. Again to what point does America and Western Europe stop before the world's government just say, you are on your own?  Zelenski has even asked America to send their troops to Ukraine, which I personally have a bigger problem with than funding them with noi budget in mind

Definitely the US should not send troops to Ukraine. That is not on the table.

I think the expense of funding Ukraine is not that high in the grand scheme of things. Way, way cheaper than any US war we've been in.

[Hardkill]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

Definitely the US should not send troops to Ukraine. That is not on the table.

I think the expense of funding Ukraine is not that high in the grand scheme of things. Way, way cheaper than any US war we've been in.

That's why I don't get why there is a sizable amount of Americans who wants us to stop funding Ukraine for this war. We have way more than enough aid available for the Ukranians and no American soldier or US citizen is getting hurt by this at all.

Edited June 2, 2023 by Hardkill

[Leo Gura]

Also, don't forget, it's not that Ukraine is just given free money. They have take on massive debt to the US. Ukraine will have to pay some of it back once things stabilize. If Putin is allowed to steal all their resources, Ukraine will not be able to pay anything back.

If you look at a long time frame of 20+ years, if Ukraine can rebuff Putin successfully, it will be in a good position to repay much of the debts.

Edited June 2, 2023 by Leo Gura

[Hardkill]

50 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Also, don't forget, it's not that Ukraine is just given free money. They have take on massive debt to the US. Ukraine will have to pay some of it back once things stabilize. If Putin is allowed to steal all their resources, Ukraine will not be able to pay anything back.

If you look at a long time frame of 20+ years, if Ukraine can rebuff Putin successfully, it will be in a good position to repay much of the debts.

Ahh,

So, if Ukraine can successfully win this war in some way, then America could make a serious profit off this war, correct?

[EugeneTheSage]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Also, don't forget, it's not that Ukraine is just given free money. They have take on massive debt to the US. Ukraine will have to pay some of it back once things stabilize. If Putin is allowed to steal all their resources, Ukraine will not be able to pay anything back.

If you look at a long time frame of 20+ years, if Ukraine can rebuff Putin successfully, it will be in a good position to repay much of the debts.

Some of the help provided by the US is even beneficial for american budget. Bradley infantry fighting vehicles would have needed to be disposed and this requires money. Instead they will serve the Ukraine.

[Danioover9000]

@Hardkill

14 hours ago, Hardkill said:

Ahh,

So, if Ukraine can successfully win this war in some way, then America could make a serious profit off this war, correct?

   Of course there's likely possibility for America to profit from this situation. Why would the Nord stream pipeline coincidentally get bombed outta nowhere? 

[Hardkill]

15 hours ago, Blackhawk said:

"Basic guidelines for quality posting:

No conspiracy theories: Covid hoax, 9/11 inside job, David Icke stuff, reptilians, Pizzagate, QAnnon, pedophilia accusations, the Jewish question, holocaust denial, etc."

https://www.actualized.org/forum/guidelines/

What are you talking about? How is what I just said a conspiracy theory? 

The US military-industrial complex is a massive business for our country and whether we like it or not it is still an essential part of the US economy.

[Danioover9000]

@Hardkill

1 hour ago, Hardkill said:

What are you talking about? How is what I just said a conspiracy theory? 

The US military-industrial complex is a massive business for our country and whether we like it or not it is still an essential part of the US economy.

   Empty threats, don't worry as long as you word it clearly that it isn't a conspiracy theory. Gaslighting tactics at this point.

[Danioover9000]

@Hardkill  Probably how you worded your post here:

17 hours ago, Hardkill said:

Ahh,

So, if Ukraine can successfully win this war in some way, then America could make a serious profit off this war, correct?

   Which assumes America's involvement is only profit driven in this Ukraine/Russia war, and no other factors like geopolitical, ideological, economic, or other reasons besides that. IMO, it could have been a conspiracy theory if you're included the Nord stream pipeline getting blown up because Biden okayed the military decision, which has immense ramifications to the war and could have escalated the situation. At this point that'sconsidered a conspiracy theory as we have no clear evidence yet that verifies that point.

4 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Hardkill

   Empty threats, don't worry as long as you word it clearly that it isn't a conspiracy theory. Gaslighting tactics at this point.

   From the other user I mean.

[Hardkill]

9 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Hardkill

   Empty threats, don't worry as long as you word it clearly that it isn't a conspiracy theory. Gaslighting tactics at this point.

Well, then I don't know why he is trolling me.

I mean to be clear, the more I learn about how government, politics, international affairs, economics, business, and finances works in the world the more I realize how complex and nuanced all of it is. 

The military-industrial complex can't, for the sake of constantly making profits, just always force our government to order our military to go to war with another country or even coerce the government to send military equipment and other kinds of foreign to our foreign allies. However, they a lot of times are able to pressure our political leaders in doing so depending what the circumstances are. One reason does have to do with the US wanting/needing to bolster our economy overall, but there are several other reasons such as those pertaining to geopolitical issues, ideological situations, etc.

Edited June 2, 2023 by Hardkill

[Danioover9000]

@Hardkill

1 minute ago, Hardkill said:

Well, then I don't know why he is trolling me.

I mean to be clear, the more I learn about how government, politics, international affairs, economics, business, and finances works in the world the more I realize how complex and nuanced all of it is. 

The military-industrial complex can't, for the sake of constantly making profits, just always force our government to order our military to go to war with another country or even coerce the government to send military equipment and other kinds of foreign to our foreign allies. However, they a lot of times are able to pressure our political leaders in doing so depending what the circumstances are.

   I don't know why, but I'm reminded of some historical event back then. Wasn't there some scandal or some incident in America about this? It could be in another part of the world about a puppeteer government body?

   I'm not sure about the military forcing the American government, could you elaborate more? Coercion part maybe I agree here, but explanation is still needed.

[Danioover9000]

@Blackhawk  Do you have explicit proof that @Hardkill has a post that clearly shows he's talking about a conspiracy theory? Which conspiracy theory and which post?

[Hardkill]

3 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Hardkill  Probably how you worded your post here:

   Which assumes America's involvement is only profit driven in this Ukraine/Russia war, and no other factors like geopolitical, ideological, economic, or other reasons besides that. IMO, it could have been a conspiracy theory if you're included the Nord stream pipeline getting blown up because Biden okayed the military decision, which has immense ramifications to the war and could have escalated the situation. At this point that'sconsidered a conspiracy theory as we have no clear evidence yet that verifies that point.

I don't believe in a such a conspiracy theory like that. I sincerely doubt that the Biden administration would've wanted that pipeline destroyed. In fact, I am sure that Biden and everyone in his admin wish that the destruction of the pipeline didn't happen because ever since that happened, the US has been forced to exports a significant amount of oil and natural gas to Europe, thereby having made the inflation problem in our country even worse than it already was after Russia began its invasion of Ukraine. Furthermore, Biden and all of the people working under him are not the kind of people who would take any pleasure in seeing any of our European allies suffer economically or suffer in any at all for any reason.

[Leo Gura]

23 hours ago, Hardkill said:

Ahh,

So, if Ukraine can successfully win this war in some way, then America could make a serious profit off this war, correct?

The US gov is prolly not gonna directly profit. But at least offset some of the cost.

Of course the defense contractors profit regardless because they sell to the US not to Ukraine.

Edited June 3, 2023 by Leo Gura

[D2sage]

They don't make "profits" like a typical business would.

But it can certainly simulate economic growth.

For example, access to Ukrainians' rich mineral deposits and their significant rich fertile soil.

After the war, the military equipment like metals will be recycled. This means dismantling and smelting it down so metals can be reused. And this is process is often done by specialized companies with license to handle military waste.

Edited June 3, 2023 by D2sage

[Danioover9000]

@D2sage

3 hours ago, D2sage said:

They don't make "profits" like a typical business would.

But it can certainly simulate economic growth.

For example, access to Ukrainians' rich mineral deposits and their significant rich fertile soil.

After the war, the military equipment like metals will be recycled. This means dismantling and smelting it down so metals can be reused. And this is process is often done by specialized companies with license to handle military waste.

   Seems legit, it's part of the geopolitical power play. In fact, when Ukraine discovered the rich oil deposit in it's region and in the Crimea sea, that was part of Russia's concern because if Ukraine has the resources it could extract those new oil deposits, sell them to the west and maybe east, and fuel it's acceleration to being a sovereign country.