Does Aid for Ukraine End with This Election?

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Watching election coverage on France24 News and that question came up.

The argument is that if Trump wins, he won't ask for Ukraine aid, while if Kamala wins but the Rs win either House (Senate looks likely) Congress won't ask for Ukraine aid.

The counter-argument is that if Trump loses, enough Rs would drop their opposition to helping Ukraine. But is that true?

 

[noStemsnoSTICKS]

Watching election coverage on France24 News and that question came up.

The argument is that if Trump wins, he won't ask for Ukraine aid, while if Kamala wins but the Rs win either House (Senate looks likely) Congress won't ask for Ukraine aid.

The counter-argument is that if Trump loses, enough Rs would drop their opposition to helping Ukraine. But is that true?

If trump wins, Russia wins.

If Kamala wins, it's a coin toss. At least in my opinion.

 

[SA_Hawk]

Nothing stopping Europe from sending weapons and aid even if we don’t.

 

[NorthernHawkeye]

There's enough Rs in bed with the MIC that Kamala will get whatever military action she wants.

 

[h-hawk]

FWIW I think the threat of a wider war is if trump wins and cuts off US aid. The Western countries do not have the extra equipment we have and may have to decide if an occupied Ukraine is acceptable. With the US helping, the Baltic States and Poland especially, have said this is not acceptable, the question is whether they will still feel that way when they are on their own with little support from some of the other Western nations.

 

[binsfeldcyhawk2]

no

 

[BelemNole]

Trump has told us that he would stop it. Harris has not. Vote appropriately.

 

[SA_Hawk]

If Kamala wins our attention will be on the China vs Taiwan war.

 

[VodkaSam]

Watching election coverage on France24 News and that question came up.

The argument is that if Trump wins, he won't ask for Ukraine aid, while if Kamala wins but the Rs win either House (Senate looks likely) Congress won't ask for Ukraine aid.

The counter-argument is that if Trump loses, enough Rs would drop their opposition to helping Ukraine. But is that true?

Many Republicans weren’t voting for Ukraine aid due to retribution from Trump and his MAGA mob. Hopefully with Trump gone and tied up handling his criminal charges 24/7 and grifting his cult for the very last of their $$, he will no longer have the hold on congress and senate that he had, and the country can continue to aid Ukraine’s fight and also finally address border issues, that Trump,prevented from happening.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Many Republicans weren’t voting for Ukraine aid due to retribution from Trump and his MAGA mob. Hopefully with Trump gone and tied up handling his criminal charges 24/7 and grifting his cult for the very last of their $$, he will no longer have the hold on congress and senate that he had, and the country can continue to aid Ukraine’s fight and also finally address border issues, that Trump,prevented from happening.

Yeah, hopefully. No guarantees.

Clearly the odds are bad for Ukraine if Trump wins. But they aren't necessarily great if Kamala wins.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

FWIW I think the threat of a wider war is if trump wins and cuts off US aid. The Western countries do not have the extra equipment we have and may have to decide if an occupied Ukraine is acceptable. With the US helping, the Baltic States and Poland especially, have said this is not acceptable, the question is whether they will still feel that way when they are on their own with little support from some of the other Western nations.

It's not clear that there's any end game that doesn't partition Ukraine. But the odds are certainly better for an intact, independent Ukraine if Kamala wins.

 

[Tenacious E]

Many Republicans weren’t voting for Ukraine aid due to retribution from Trump and his MAGA mob. Hopefully with Trump gone and tied up handling his criminal charges 24/7 and grifting his cult for the very last of their $$, he will no longer have the hold on congress and senate that he had, and the country can continue to aid Ukraine’s fight and also finally address border issues, that Trump,prevented from happening.

I hope if Trump loses the GOP will go back being boring sane stiffs, giving me another viable option to vote for. It will likely take another election cycle though for the sycophants to phase out.

 

[MitchLL]

We know who Vlad wants to win.

 

[Randon]

If Trump wins, aid to Ukraine will be cut off. Not once since Putin's illegal invasion has Trump condemned it. In fact he has reitterated his praise for Putin describing him as smart, savvy, and a great leader. Also, his support for NATO is in question. Remember his "Putin can have at it" statement when describing the consequences of a NATO country not paying sufficient membership dues.

 

[Rifler]

It's not membership dues,... it's a mandatory commitment for each NATO member to spend 2% of their individual GDP on their personal defense budget,.. Members who are unwilling to defend themselves, can't be counted on to help defend their NATO partners.

 

[Tenacious E]

It's not membership dues,... it's a mandatory commitment for each NATO member to spend 2% of their individual GDP on their personal defense budget,.. Members who are unwilling to defend themselves, can't be counted on to help defend their NATO partners.

I guess I look at it like a group project in college. We’re the A student, stuck with some slackers, when it comes to that. We can’t not do our best to carry the group when doing well is in our best interest.

 

[Rifler]

I guess I look at it like a group project in college. We’re the A student, stuck with some slackers, when it comes to that. We can’t not do our best to carry the group when doing well is in our best interest.

We're out of college and operating in the real world now,.. Slackers don't get a free ride.

 

[hexumhawk]

Regardless on how you feel about the Ukraine issue, it has become a loser politically. With our own border issues, people are growing more and more pissed about sending money overseas for wars.

 

[Rifler]

Correct,.. We have very real problems at home, and Ukraine can't be won,.. It can only be resolved with a negotiated settlement.

 

[Aardvark86]

Regardless of outcome, I sure hope not. They were, after all, the ones who were invaded.

That said, I've not seen anyone articulate a remotely plausible exit strategy here. As horrible a non-outcome as it would be, it seems to me that the only plausible basis is to threaten to pull it as leverage to get UKR to go back to maybe the status quo ante. What a waste of time, talent, and treasure. But what else is there? UKR is not actually going to "finally" defeat the Russians militarily here.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

We know who Vlad wants to win.

Jill Stein?

If Russia (and China and Iran, etc,) really just want to disrupt - as opposed to wanting Trump to win - they should have poured their efforts into backing third parties. They didn't (as far as I know), so the idea that Russia didn't try to swing it for Trump in 2016, 2020 and now strikes me as ludicrous. Sure, they want to be generally disruptive, but they definitely want Trump to win, then and now.

 

[noStemsnoSTICKS]

Regardless of outcome, I sure hope not. They were, after all, the ones who were invaded.

That said, I've not seen anyone articulate a remotely plausible exit strategy here. As horrible a non-outcome as it would be, it seems to me that the only plausible basis is to threaten to pull it as leverage to get UKR to go back to maybe the status quo ante. What a waste of time, talent, and treasure. But what else is there? UKR is not actually going to "finally" defeat the Russians militarily here.

I don't see it that way. More than 600,000 Russian soldiers have been killed in Ukraine. And now North Korea is sending their boys to be killed. If Ukraine had more support, Russia wouldn't have a choice but to retreat and call it a day. They have one of the worst militaries in the world. And they know it.

 

[Aardvark86]

I don't see it that way. More than 600,000 Russian soldiers have been killed in Ukraine. And now North Korea is sending their boys to be killed. If Ukraine had more support, Russia wouldn't have a choice but to retreat and call it a day. They have one of the worst militaries in the world. And they know it.

ok then general, at what geographic point of counterattack occupation does vlad just raise the white flag?

 

[noStemsnoSTICKS]

ok then general, at what geographic point of counterattack occupation does vlad just raise the white flag?

What do you mean by, "geographic point of counterattack occupation"?

 

[MichaelKeller99]

No, unfortunately.

 

[MitchLL]

No, unfortunately.

You think Russia stops with Ukraine?

 

[seminole97]

If Trump wins, aid to Ukraine will be cut off. Not once since Putin's illegal invasion has Trump condemned it.

Trump condemns Russia invasion; hints again at 2024 presidential run​

By Alexandra Ulmer
February 27, 202 1:57 AM EST
Updated 3 years ago

ORLANDO, Fla., Feb 26 (Reuters) - Former President Donald Trump condemned on Saturday Russia's invasion of Ukraine and said he was praying for Ukrainians, switching tone from his praise for Russian President Vladimir Putin earlier this week.

 

[Aardvark86]

What do you mean by, "geographic point of counterattack occupation"?

if you are suggesting that russia can beaten militarily, what is the pain point that ukraine inflects, or the geographic position they take -- presumably in some sort of counteroffensive - where Russia gives up.

 

[Tenacious E]

We're out of college and operating in the real world now,.. Slackers don't get a free ride.

All kinds of people get subsidies and tax breaks. Especially ones important to our national interests.

 

[thewop]

Watching election coverage on France24 News and that question came up.

The argument is that if Trump wins, he won't ask for Ukraine aid, while if Kamala wins but the Rs win either House (Senate looks likely) Congress won't ask for Ukraine aid.

The counter-argument is that if Trump loses, enough Rs would drop their opposition to helping Ukraine. But is that true?

Ukraine is getting money regardless, it's just that there would be different OTHER BS in the bill whether a D or R president has to sign it.

Trump isn't signing a Ukraine aid bill that provides taxpayer funded transitions surgery for kids, and Kamala isn't signing a Ukraine aid bill that includes a national voter ID requirement.

 

[noStemsnoSTICKS]

if you are suggesting that russia can beaten militarily, what is the pain point that ukraine inflects, or the geographic position they take -- presumably in some sort of counteroffensive - where Russia gives up.

I don't think it will be based on geography. I think it will depend on the number of dead Russians piling up, and/or China and N. Korea withdrawing support.

 

[Tenacious E]

if you are suggesting that russia can beaten militarily, what is the pain point that ukraine inflects, or the geographic position they take -- presumably in some sort of counteroffensive - where Russia gives up.

Well, they are at the point where they are using North Koreans and their weapons. But, who knows?

 

[Aardvark86]

Well, they are at the point where they are using North Koreans and their weapons. But, who knows?

if you're suggesting that ukraine wins a war of attrition against russia, well...that would be something. I mean it's an interesting theory but i don't think it's really been done outside a lab.

 

[Tenacious E]

if you're suggesting that ukraine wins a war of attrition against russia, well...that would be something. I mean it's an interesting theory but i don't think it's really been done outside a lab.

I guess it depends on how you define attrition. If you mean they slug it out toe to toe until the last man standing, then no. If you mean they inflict enough pain to force retreats or simply wipe out forces, it could happen. Either way, every second Russia is dealing with Ukraine it is not invading another country. Best defense dollars we have ever spent.

 

[noStemsnoSTICKS]

if you're suggesting that ukraine wins a war of attrition against russia, well...that would be something. I mean it's an interesting theory but i don't think it's really been done outside a lab.

At some point Russia will have to cut its losses. 600,000 dead soldiers and counting. They're actually letting people out of prison in exchange for military service at the front. So they're fighting with an untrained military, and shitty equipment. And economic sanctions that have crippled their economy.

 

[artradley]

Precedence says that if Trump can extort political favors from Zelensky, the aid will continue...

 

[artradley]

At some point Russia will have to cut its losses. 600,000 dead soldiers and counting. They're actually letting people out of prison in exchange for military service at the front. So they're fighting with an untrained military, and shitty equipment. And economic sanctions that have crippled their economy.

I honestly thought you were picking some highly inflated number out of your butt in that post. But this number seems to be generally accepted; with Ukraine in the hundreds of thousands, as well.

 

[Aardvark86]

I honestly thought you were picking some highly inflated number out of your butt in that post. But this number seems to be generally accepted; with Ukraine in the hundreds of thousands, as well.

exactly; the last clause is the key. To be clear, that's casualties rather than deaths, but ukr is not exactly what i would call better positioned to absorb those kinds of numbers than russia is.

and the fact that russia is using prisoners and koreans is not something to take heart in. it's a luxury they can afford.