4 ms·

Uhhh that’s why it’s better to fund Ukraine to fight the battle for us before it’s actually on NATO’s doorstep. Not that confusing.

Clubber 3y ago
Sure, I support funding Ukraine 100% for that very reason, but consider what happens when Ukraine runs out of troops. Russia has a 3:1 advantage. https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-demography-of-war-ukraine-vs-russia https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-demography-of-war-ukraine-vs-...
- KaiserPro 3y ago
  If you use your troops as bait for tanks, then sure having a 3:1 people advantage is useful. If you have a bit more respect for the lives of your citizens, its not so much of a disadvantage.
- ethanbond 3y ago
  Consider what happens when the Taliban runs out of troops. The United States has a 28:1 advantage.
  - Clubber 3y ago
    >Consider what happens when the Taliban runs out of troops. The United States has a 28:1 advantage. The US conquered and held Afghanistan for 20 years and we could have done it for another 20+ years, we just lost the political will to do so. I'm in total agreement with getting out of Afghanistan, as ugly as it was.
    - ethanbond 3y ago
      The US didn’t “conquer” Afghanistan. It was fighting a nonstop insurgency that obviously we couldn’t sustain for another 20+ years as evidenced by the fact we didn’t sustain it for another 20+ years. Losing political will is quite literally “losing,” and we left and the Taliban now gets to (actually) rule their country how they want to.
      - Clubber 3y ago
        >The US didn’t “conquer” Afghanistan It certainly did. It took the Taliban out of power and installed our own government. Also, all conquered countries have insurgencies. France, Poland, Belgium, Holland all had insurgencies and they were certainly conquered by Germany in WW2. Insurgencies by conquered people have been happening since before Alexander. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conquer https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conquer >Losing political will is quite literally “losing,” Maybe. Did Britain lose to India because they lost the political will to occupy them? Canada? Australia? Maybe. Did the US lose to the Philippines because we no longer colonized them? Doesn't seem like it. I'd be hard pressed to find any rational historian to say the US lost to the Philippines. >It was fighting a nonstop insurgency that obviously we couldn’t sustain for another 20+ years as evidenced by the fact we didn’t sustain it for another 20+ years. Afghanistan didn't force us out. We could have kept doing what we did for another 20 years. It would have been as stupid as the last 20 years, but we certainly had the financial and military means. Anyhow this is a tangent. If we go to war with Russia, there will be a draft and millions will likely die. This has been a known for the last 80 years. I'm amazed people don't think this would be true. Those who forget history are destined to repeat it I guess. Better start getting in shape.
        llamaimperative 3y ago
        No one is disagreeing with “if we go to war with Russia there will be a draft and millions will die.” They’re disagreeing with your suggestion that the way to avoid war with Russia is by not supporting Ukraine now or that Ukraine is necessarily doomed because of a 3:1 difference in manpower. If you want to talk about repeating history, maybe look up how well appeasement worked with the Nazis, another lying autocratic regime wallowing in delusions about its own greatness.
        Clubber 3y ago
        >your suggestion that the way to avoid war with Russia is by not supporting Ukraine now Show me where I said that.

Clubber 3y ago

Sure, I support funding Ukraine 100% for that very reason, but consider what happens when Ukraine runs out of troops. Russia has a 3:1 advantage. https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-demography-of-war-ukraine-vs-russia https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-demography-of-war-ukraine-vs-...

KaiserPro 3y ago
If you use your troops as bait for tanks, then sure having a 3:1 people advantage is useful. If you have a bit more respect for the lives of your citizens, its not so much of a disadvantage.
ethanbond 3y ago
Consider what happens when the Taliban runs out of troops. The United States has a 28:1 advantage.
- Clubber 3y ago
  >Consider what happens when the Taliban runs out of troops. The United States has a 28:1 advantage. The US conquered and held Afghanistan for 20 years and we could have done it for another 20+ years, we just lost the political will to do so. I'm in total agreement with getting out of Afghanistan, as ugly as it was.
  - ethanbond 3y ago
    The US didn’t “conquer” Afghanistan. It was fighting a nonstop insurgency that obviously we couldn’t sustain for another 20+ years as evidenced by the fact we didn’t sustain it for another 20+ years. Losing political will is quite literally “losing,” and we left and the Taliban now gets to (actually) rule their country how they want to.
    - Clubber 3y ago
      >The US didn’t “conquer” Afghanistan It certainly did. It took the Taliban out of power and installed our own government. Also, all conquered countries have insurgencies. France, Poland, Belgium, Holland all had insurgencies and they were certainly conquered by Germany in WW2. Insurgencies by conquered people have been happening since before Alexander. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conquer https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conquer >Losing political will is quite literally “losing,” Maybe. Did Britain lose to India because they lost the political will to occupy them? Canada? Australia? Maybe. Did the US lose to the Philippines because we no longer colonized them? Doesn't seem like it. I'd be hard pressed to find any rational historian to say the US lost to the Philippines. >It was fighting a nonstop insurgency that obviously we couldn’t sustain for another 20+ years as evidenced by the fact we didn’t sustain it for another 20+ years. Afghanistan didn't force us out. We could have kept doing what we did for another 20 years. It would have been as stupid as the last 20 years, but we certainly had the financial and military means. Anyhow this is a tangent. If we go to war with Russia, there will be a draft and millions will likely die. This has been a known for the last 80 years. I'm amazed people don't think this would be true. Those who forget history are destined to repeat it I guess. Better start getting in shape.
      - llamaimperative 3y ago
        No one is disagreeing with “if we go to war with Russia there will be a draft and millions will die.” They’re disagreeing with your suggestion that the way to avoid war with Russia is by not supporting Ukraine now or that Ukraine is necessarily doomed because of a 3:1 difference in manpower. If you want to talk about repeating history, maybe look up how well appeasement worked with the Nazis, another lying autocratic regime wallowing in delusions about its own greatness.
        Clubber 3y ago
        >your suggestion that the way to avoid war with Russia is by not supporting Ukraine now Show me where I said that.