6 ms·

> is it any wonder we see mainstream media enthusiastically endorsing more and more weapons for Ukraine? this is your "textbook" demonstration of the military-i

• willcipriano 3y ago
  [flagged]
  • _kbh_ 3y ago
    > We were on the right side in Iraq, with the same voices giving it full throated support, that was until the fog of war lifted and pretty much everyone accepted it was a scam. How do you think Ukraine is a scam?, I can show you hundred of videos of Ukrainians using western weapons to kill the imperialistic invaders that are trying to end their existence.
    • willcipriano 3y ago
      I can show you videos of the twin towers falling, that doesn't mean that it benefits the average citizen to go drone strike some weddings. For one thing, I question the europeans and their lackluster response to what is occurring on their continent. Why is the US taxpayer so much more invested in this contrasted to a French or German taxpayer? Personally looking at things at home we have higher priorities than this. Other nations seem to be making a similar choice given their lack of financial commitment.
      • beart 3y ago
        Germany has increased their defense spending by at least $100 billion since the start of the war.
        • deleted 3y ago
          [deleted]
        • willcipriano 3y ago
          That's nice for them. Germany committed to send 2.47 billion in contrast to 46 and a half billion from the US. https://www.statista.com/chart/27278/military-aid-to-ukraine-by-country/ https://www.statista.com/chart/27278/military-aid-to-ukraine...
          • _kbh_ 3y ago
            The German military budget is around 1/15th the USA, so thats not that far off being in line.
            • willcipriano 3y ago
              Seems like Germany is less worried about its neighbors than we are to have such a small budget for defence.
              • _djo_ 3y ago
                They were by their own admission complacent, believing that trade and closer economic integration would remove the threat. They’ve changed their minds since Russia invaded Ukraine. Germany has also been able to benefit from the overall NATO and European security umbrella and, unlike the US, UK, or France, has no alliances or foreign territories that require it to provide security or uphold security guarantees far from home. That meant a different force design and spending profile. For instance, Germany has no strategic need for carriers, which France, the UK, and US have, purely because it doesn’t need that level of global force projection.
              • Timon3 3y ago
                How much of the bill should Germany shoulder for you to be happy with it? Please give an exact minimal amount.
                • 3y ago
      • _kbh_ 3y ago
        > I question the europeans and their lackluster response to what is occurring on their continent. You need to look at Eastern Europe to see the opposite of a lacklustre response. Poland especially has been donating a lot of gear by themselves they are one of Ukraines biggest supplies of MTB's and aircraft. Western Europes lacklustre response can be seen as a combination of thinking that Ukraine would fall quickly and not wanting to 'escalate' the conflict, likely borne at least partially from Russian intelligence efforts to stop western flows to Ukraine. > Personally looking at things at home we have higher priorities than this. Other nations seem to be making a similar choice given their lack of financial commitment. Tonnes of nations are contributing aide to Ukraine in differing amounts, a lot of other countries has militaries and supplies that are a lot smaller then American and cannot give as much.
      • lesuorac 3y ago
        > Why is the US taxpayer so much more invested in this contrasted to a French or German taxpayer? I mean the US has made a choice in that rather then doing healthcare for all and other social programs to run a jobs program through the military industrial complex. Investing into Ukraine is investing into the US as expensive missiles and etc mean that American companies (and their workers) receive a lot of tax money which goes to benefit their local (American) communities. Now you could argue that we should invest backwards into the US by building bridges to nowhere and other types of projects but my point is not that military investment is the best use way to support the economy just that is does support the economy.
      • stracer 3y ago
        > Why is the US taxpayer so much more invested in this contrasted to a French or German taxpayer? It's not about the taxpayer, but about what the powerful elites feel and want. France and Germany are closer to Russia, benefited from trade with Russia, and are strongly influenced by decades of Russian influence (Schroeder on the take, anti-war, anti-nuclear groups etc.) So they have to be brow-beaten and dragged into doing the right thing and help Ukraine. US benefits from Ukraine weakening Russia, it's a no-brainer.
    • Cosmopolitican 3y ago
      [flagged]
      • _kbh_ 3y ago
        > Is there any strategic reason the USA may have wanted this war to occur? Any reason that Russia cannot just leave Ukraine?, it would be the best way for them to maintain there forces.
        • Cosmopolitican 3y ago
          [flagged]
    • deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  • beart 3y ago
    This narrative does not jive with my memory. There were extremely vocal critics of the invasion of Iraq, long before troops were on the ground. Some of the U.S. closest allies refused to participate. Much of the international community was opposed to the invasion, even with the U.S. doing whatever it could to push for a coalition. Comparing the invasion of Iraq with the current situation in Ukraine is like comparing apples with hand grenades.
    • willcipriano 3y ago
      > This narrative does not jive with my memory. In the years since, lots of people came out and said "they were always against the war" likely creating false memories. Here is one example, it's very common: https://www.factcheck.org/2019/09/bidens-record-on-iraq-war/ https://www.factcheck.org/2019/09/bidens-record-on-iraq-war/ The war went on for decades, during that time both Democrats and Republicans had control of the presidency and congress at various points, nobody saw fit to even bring a vote to end the war. They would go years without mentioning it, and now that they want to start another they "were always against it" all of the sudden.
      • lesuorac 3y ago
        Public opinion was really 50-50 [1] in the US so you're going to hear a lot of people that say they were against it because a lot of people were. Of course, it went from a high of 2/3 for to now 2/3 against so the 1/3 flip-flopers will also be a lot of people. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_opinion_in_the_United_States_on_the_invasion_of_Iraq#Post_9/11_sentiment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_opinion_in_the_United_S...
        • westurner 3y ago
          List of congressional opponents of the Iraq War: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_congressional_opponents_of_the_Iraq_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_congressional_opponent... That administration increased expenses by trillions and then cut tax revenue by trillions ( "starve the beast", "scorched earth") and now we're at shutdown showdown again without money for healthcare, infrastructure, or education. We need to fund Q12 and K12CS education and update curricula to win the actual competition. Without funding due to defense offense spending without ROI, we cannot fund education and will thus also lose the real war: the War on Healthcare. Repeal of the 2002 AUMF: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repeal_of_the_2002_AUMF https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repeal_of_the_2002_AUMF Senate Report on Iraqi WMD Intelligence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Report_on_Iraqi_WMD_Intelligence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Report_on_Iraqi_WMD_Int... Had they floated "we're going to start multi-trillion-dollar war and cut then cut taxes" in the election, I doubt they would've won Florida by a hanging chad in 1999. . (The full cost of war calculations should include lifetime medical for now-disabled veterans, whose families also need healthcare.) I think you should pay the bills for your war now.
  • mindslight 3y ago
    > Fool me once. So you're saying that you based your stance on the Iraq War from what the mainstream media told you? That's the problem right there! I was against the Iraq War from the start. Concretely, I was at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15_February_2003_anti-war_protests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15_February_2003_anti-war_prot... , so my recollection isn't just post-rationalization. It was an uphill battle against the US mainstream media for sure. The anti-war stance only turned out to be more and more vindicated as time went on. Meanwhile when I saw what happened to Ukraine in 2022, I couldn't see anything besides a justified war of self defense and self determination. I had been relativizing what had been happening in Ukraine previously, along with other global US involvements, as the US military industrial complex doing its thing. But the 2022 invasion was a clear cut attempt to conquer and subjugate the country - with Russia as the aggressor just as the US had been in Iraq. I've always been abstractly pro-self-defense, but it's been a weird feeling supporting a specific war, especially in agreement with the mainstream. I reflect on it often, but my conclusions are stable. I also lament the US political capital that was wasted on Iraq, that allows Russia to successfully propagandize western support for Ukraine as being from the same vein, despite Russia being the clear aggressor.
    • willcipriano 3y ago
      I agree with all your points. I don't see how it is a problem for a US citizen. Russia isn't a serious threat to the US, nor are they even really much of a threat to Europe if military spending is any indication. If funds were unlimited, sure but right now we have other problems and can't afford it.
      • mindslight 3y ago
        Whether it is in our national interest to materially support Ukraine is a different question than whether doing so puts us on the right side. I would say the answer to that is also yes. The US is essentially the leader of a nominally consentual economic federation [0], which is what allows USD to remain the world reserve currency while creating more of it. If the US does not support a country that is trying to economically integrate with us, it's a strong data point that perhaps developing a relationship with the US isn't so valuable. This would facilitate the diminishing of US dominance that China is salivating over. Furthermore, it's not like the big dollar amounts for Ukraine are being sent over there, or even being spent today. Rather it is the value of supplies that have already been manufactured and were sitting around. But rather than sitting on a huge military stockpile and considering the problem solved, we're better off rotating through stock and making sure that manufacturing supply chains still work. (I hate this reason because it was also a justification for Iraq, Afghanistan, and other assorted military actions. But it's true) And lastly, solving domestic problems at home is not due to a lack of funds/resources, but rather a lack of political will because entrenched interests benefit from the status quo, and shamelessly buy politicians to maintain it. [0] of course many times those giving consent are elites of a society, at the expense of the rest of the citizens. But that is still progress from "surprise, there's a foreign army marching through your streets!"
  • euroderf 3y ago
    Bring up Cheney on charges of treason. 'Nuf said.