> You are also continuing to sidestep why it's actually in the US' national interest to keep this war going as long as possible. The strategic interest is that

> You are also continuing to sidestep why it's actually in the US' national interest to keep this war going as long as possible. The strategic interest is that we punish Russia for taking Crimea and annexing swaths of land. Any other country that makes this mistake will be punished by the USA. We cannot let countries just take over huge swaths of land of other countries like Hitler did Poland, (formerly called) Czechoslovakia, Austria or France. When power-hungry dictators think that its in their interest to conquer land, they'll continue to conquer land. If they see that the world's largest military is willing and able to come to the defender's aid, then those countries around the world will stop thinking about attacking smaller nations. This is in our strategic interest because China is eyeing Taiwan. If China decides to attack Taiwan, then they know that the might of the US Military stands against them. If not directly, then at very least indirectly. ------------- The fact remains: the "plan" was that Russia took over Ukraine and then USA supports an insurrection over the next decade with anti-tank Javelins. Ukraine overperformed: their army still stands, their leader survived the assassination attempts. Its only natural we USA reward them for their efforts. We're giving Ukraine more arms than we ever expected to give them, but that's because they're doing so, so so so much better than anyone in the USA could have dreamed or planned for. There's a chance Ukraine actually kicks Russia out, and if _THEY_, the Ukrainians, are willing to fight for that I say we let them. Its really not that much money that we're giving them. And its in our strategic interests to defend the 1994 Budapest memorandum. (we _HAVE_ to show the world that disarming from nuclear weapons gives them a security guarantee / benefit from the United States. We want more countries disarming from nukes). The $50 Billion or so we're spending on the Ukrainians this past year have been so much better than the $10+ Trillions we spent on the Afghanis. If this deal remains this cheap, its not even going to make me blink. I think you're not realizing how tiny the Ukrainian war budget really is. Yes, the goals are vague. But the goals are vague because the Ukrainians are overperforming so much better than our stated goals. ------- So strategic interest? 1. Punishing those who annex other territory 2. Supporting the 1994 Budapest Memorandum and showing the world that nuclear disarmament works, maybe not on the Russian/Soviet side but at least on the USA side of the agreement. 3. Permanently reducing the Russian military through the atrophy of this war. 4. Testing our weapons in support of Taiwan should China be stupid enough to do anything in the next decade.