Has Biden made good on his promise of “severe consequences” for Putin regarding Ukraine?

[sober_teacher]

All the sanctions have done is condition the Russian economy to operate without the dollar. Their trading partners as well. In the end it may hurt us more than them.

I no longer believe those inflated Russian losses posts we see with regularity on here.
If true why does Russia seem to be getting stronger and Ukraine weaker?

I believe those post are thought by the Ukrainians to be necessary to keep the aid flowing.

I think Biden did what he had to and my main criticism would be that he slow leaked the sanctions out and dampened the effectiveness causing them to fail.

Well a major reason is that Russia simply outweighs Ukraine by a great deal and can absorb heavier loses more than Ukraine can. Another reason is that the delay in sending additional supplies to Ukraine is affecting their logistics.

 

[sober_teacher]

House Republicans have conditioned Ukraine aid on securing our own border first, and separating aid packages. House Republicans passed a border bill last May, and the Senate and White House have ignored it.

They have tried to have it both ways.

You know darn well that the House bill they passed was never something that would get passed in the Senate and wasn’t serious legislation.

 

[Jerome Silberman]

That's an interesting take. We've pretty much had continuous war since Korea. We provided arms to Syrian rebels, and they ran away, leaving the arms to Syria. We abandoned billions of military equipment in Afghanistan, after providing arms to Afghans who then ran away, leaving the arms to the Taliban. We provide military equipment to Israel, and then tell them they can only use them selectively against enemies who are actively attacking them. We provide military jets to Saudi Arabia, who sends pilots to the US for training, and one of those pilots shoots up a US military base.

If Russia defeats the Ukraine, what will happen to the unused military equipment we provided to Ukraine? What happens to that same equipment now, when Russia wins a battle?

Why do liberals scream about law abiding US citizens having the right to bear arms, but advocate providing actual weapons of war to foreign countries with no accountability?

Our economic growth is tied at the hip to defense spending and has been since everyone here was born, and I'm not advocating anything. Just that I think in the case of Ukraine(no the) vs Russia, it's better to support Ukraine than it is to support Russia.

There is no "sitting it out", no matter how long your hold your breath.

 

[Tom Paris]

I have read every reply and I have no idea WTF you’re talking about. Just about every poster not named Finance is acknowledging that Russia has lost a lot. Who are all of these the cons in this thread that are making you sick with their responses?

And you can eat a big bowl of shit with your “Don’t forget about me” nonsense you keep spewing regards to my threads. Especially since EVERY one of your posts since your existence here has been the exact same thing.

Yeah...because I start so many threads looking for attention. Do you know what you just did? You made a...wait for it...false equivalency!!

 

[OrlandNole]

House Republicans have conditioned Ukraine aid on securing our own border first, and separating aid packages. House Republicans passed a border bill last May, and the Senate and White House have ignored it.

OK, but since that time, a bipartisan House put together an package that tethers Ukraine aid to border security measures at the House GOP direction. That bill was subsequently tanked (at the direction of Trump).

Is that not accurate?

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

How long should we stay the course, and how much additional debt should we incur in the process?

If we keep providing aid, what cuts should be made to our budget to offset the aid?

The aid is a tiny part of our budget. And we should stay the course as long as it takes. I'd rather have Ukraine stop Putin's ambitions of triggering WW3 than find out how World War 3 actually goes.

If you want to make cuts, why don't we make cuts to our own bloated military budget?

We could cut about 300 billion dollars from our military budget and still be hitting the 2% of GDP benchmark.

 

[jamesvanderwulf]

When Obama allowed Russia to violate the Budapest Memorandum in 2014 with the annexation of Crimea, the stage of appeasement was set. Early on Zelensky begged the US for air support ( which could be argued they had a right to expect ) but we tried to get by on the cheap and just send munitions and intelligence but that's not been enough. We owe it to the Ukrainians from the 1994 agreement when their nuclear arsenal was dismantled...

 

[FAUlty Gator]

Yeah...because I start so many threads looking for attention. Do you know what you just did? You made a...wait for it...false equivalency!!

So, I make threads for attention. That's what you're going with here? Of all the posters and topics here, the ones I start on multitudes of topics are done purely for the attention. Your keen incite to the goings on around here is just fantastic. Ooh...and you threw in another claim of "false equivalency" I see, because you were so close to having a post that was slightly different than every other one you've ever posted. Dang. You almost did it.

Time to head to your next move now. And that is to talk to and fellate another one of the 5 posters you mimic about me...in this same thread. I always try to guess who it will be. Fun game. OK go...I got my choice.

Spoiler: My guess

Riley or global

 

[Finance85]

The aid is a tiny part of our budget. And we should stay the course as long as it takes. I'd rather have Ukraine stop Putin's ambitions of triggering WW3 than find out how World War 3 actually goes.

If you want to make cuts, why don't we make cuts to our own bloated military budget?

We could cut about 300 billion dollars from our military budget and still be hitting the 2% of GDP benchmark.

WW III isn't going to happen over a Russian conventional war with Ukraine. There's no difference to Russia in our current involvement vs direct defensive involvement. Those are just word games being played to justify slow walking aid instead of simply putting an end to it.

 

[sober_teacher]

When Obama allowed Russia to violate the Budapest Memorandum in 2014 with the annexation of Crimea, the stage of appeasement was set. Early on Zelensky begged the US for air support ( which could be argued they had a right to expect ) but we tried to get by on the cheap and just send munitions and intelligence but that's not been enough. We owe it to the Ukrainians from the 1994 agreement when their nuclear arsenal was dismantled...

Only quibble I have here is whether Obama truly allowed anything. there was zero political support domestically, and for that matter in Europe in general regarding intervention on any level at that time, for a number of reasons.

 

[Tom Paris]

So, I make threads for attention. That's what you're going with here? Of all the posters and topics here, the ones I start on multitudes of topics are done purely for the attention. Your keen incite to the goings on around here is just fantastic. Ooh...and you threw in another claim of "false equivalency" I see, because you were so close to having a post that was slightly different than every other one you've ever posted. Dang. You almost did it.

Time to head to your next move now. And that is to talk to and fellate another one of the 5 posters you mimic about me...in this same thread. I always try to guess who it will be. Fun game. OK go...I got my choice.

Spoiler: My guess

Riley or global

Your lack of self-awareness is astounding. When multiple people call you out for something you do, it might just be a YOU thing. But like I have told you multiple times, for over a decade, you're incapable of admitting you are wrong about anything.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

WW III isn't going to happen over a Russian conventional war with Ukraine. There's no difference to Russia in our current involvement vs direct defensive involvement. Those are just word games being played to justify slow walking aid instead of simply putting an end to it.

You sure about that? Hitler thought he could invade Poland and nothing would happen despite the Brits and the French guaranteeing to defend Poland.

What makes you think that Putin wouldn't do the same thing with Estonia.

 

[jamesvanderwulf]

Only quibble I have here is whether Obama truly allowed anything. there was zero political support domestically, and for that matter in Europe in general regarding intervention on any level at that time, for a number of reasons.

So the agreement crafted by the US, Russia, UK and all the European countries in 1994 is disregarded for political reasons. Got it. Once again the US word is worthless, just like the Indian Treaties of yesteryear. Security assurances mean nothing when the time comes to put up...

 

[sober_teacher]

So the agreement crafted by the US, Russia, UK and all the European countries in 1994 is disregarded for political reasons. Got it. Once again the US word is worthless, just like the Indian Treaties of yesteryear. Security assurances mean nothing when the time comes to put up...

Not what I said at all.

 

[ihhawk]

So the agreement crafted by the US, Russia, UK and all the European countries in 1994 is disregarded for political reasons. Got it. Once again the US word is worthless, just like the Indian Treaties of yesteryear. Security assurances mean nothing when the time comes to put up...

I have asked some of my democrat friends about the difference between Crimea and Ukraine. When Russia took Crimea, Obama responded with his administration sending some tweets out.

When Putin invaded Ukraine Of course the reaction was different from the democrats. Why is that?

I’ve been puzzled by it

 

[CRazzle]