65 points

I have my doubts about this.

permalink
report
reply
28 points

We all do, and even if it’s true, expect a caveat

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Ah yes. The caveat.

“I will continue support…for a price! MWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!”

Should we be worried that it’s entirely plausible to give our next/previous president an evil laugh, and it reasonably fits him?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

“we need you to do us a favour though”

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I mean the price part is already built in. A lot of the “aid” Ukraine is getting is lend lease style stuff that they’ll be paying through the nose for later IIRC.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I mean, you literally just described the exact scenario that led to his first impeachment.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

itll be traditional republican support. thoughts and prayers

permalink
report
reply
63 points

Are you kidding … who the hell can take his word about anything.

We’re better off to turn off these dumb announcements and pay no attention to anything he says because either it doesn’t make sense, its stupid, its a lie or he doesn’t mean what he says

Keep watching the news to listen to what everyone else is saying but when it comes to US government, don’t bother taking it to mean anything.

permalink
report
reply
12 points

I’m sorry. I didn’t vote for this.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Yeah, just pay attention to what he does. What he says is close to useless.

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points

Next Year:

permalink
report
reply
11 points

Gonna be the same trickle biden did… Clearly US has no interest in Ukraine winning the war. The goal is to weaken Russia.

permalink
report
reply
5 points

Your concept of a “trickle” is interesting. The US has contributed nearly as much to Ukraine as every other country combined. (As of September, that was about $92 billion from the US versus about $112 billion from all other countries).

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Most of that money was wasted on domestic corruption.

Essentially Us cleared its stock piles of what they had and dod was severally overcharged on these purchases because stock pile was no in demand.

So Ukraine was getting 1 item for price of 3.

Deliveries were delayed, stuff that was needed was not provided.

Also arbitrary restrictions lifted two years too late.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

You do realize no country is going to give up their best military secrets? And the pricing is likely true of every contributing country.

The restrictions were in no way arbitrary. This whole thing has been a game of chicken with Putin. Would you rather that other countries immediately escalated to scare Putin into launching his nukes? Frankly I’m happy it hasn’t come to that, and with multiple countries now giving the go-ahead to launch attacks inside of Russian territory, maybe the Russian people will start questioning the motivations behind this war that Putin started.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Yes, it does add up to a lot, but it always came in just enough to keep Russia at bay. Also the permissions around where and how which weapons could be used.
When Russia invaded, Putin had no idea how corrupt, weak and inefficient his forces were.
This trickle allowed Russia enough time to turn around much of that, getting us to the point where they are now severely threatening Ukraine. If the military aid was more decisive, Russia could have been defeated early on, and the total spend could have been less than where it is now.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

As I mentioned to the other commenter, all countries proceeded with discretion. We also didn’t realize how bad of shape Russia’s infrastructure was in, so that demanded a slow approach to try and prevent a nuclear retaliation. Now we know that’s not going to happen, thus lifting the restrictions on attacking within Russian territory.

It’s funny how the opinion on the US’s role in this war over the last two years has gone from “WTF are we doing risking a nuclear war with Russia” to today where folks seem to be saying “why didn’t we stomp Russia from the very beginning?”. The answer in both cases was obvious, I don’t know why anyone has forgotten the reason for that initial caution.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Ukraine

!ukraine@sopuli.xyz

Create post

News and discussion related to Ukraine

*Sympathy for enemy combatants is prohibited.

*No content depicting extreme violence or gore.

*Posts containing combat footage should include [Combat] in title

*Combat videos containing any footage of a visible human must be flagged NSFW

Server Rules
  1. Remember the human! (no harassment, threats, etc.)
  2. No racism or other discrimination
  3. No Nazis, QAnon or similar
  4. No porn
  5. No ads or spam (includes charities)
  6. No content against Finnish law

Donate to support Ukraine’s Defense

Donate to support Humanitarian Aid


Community stats

  • 3.2K

    Monthly active users

  • 3.5K

    Posts

  • 12K

    Comments