- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Why in the world is the House openly taking a side in a foreign war?
Posted on 12/22/22 at 8:47 am
Posted on 12/22/22 at 8:47 am
Yes, I know there is another thread. I wanted to have a political discussion, not some specultive bullshite about "every person in congress is getting paid" without a shred of evidence.
AP News
In fairness, we have a long track record of sticking our noses in conflicts where we didn't belong. Generally, the peacenicks of the left whined about it while accusing the GOP of being warmongers and blaming the "military industrial complex" for profiting from death.
What changed?
How did the Russian invasion of Ukraine become a "holy war" of sorts for the Democrats in 2022? Why are GOP House members cheering like school girls at a pep rally?
Do we really believe that by arming the Ukranians we are spreading democracy?
Do we really beleive that lacking our support The Russians would roll on Kiev and just keep going until they run out of real estate at the Aegean and Adriatic? Is this really "imperialist Russia"?
Here is where the nonthinkers on the board accuse me of being a "Putin supporter". That is not the case. Not sending billions to fight a proxy war in the armpit of the old Soviet Empire is not tacit support of a cold war relic.
AP News
quote:
WASHINGTON (AP) — Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy told cheering U.S. legislators during a defiant wartime visit to the nation’s capital on Wednesday that against all odds his country still stands, thanking Americans for helping to fund the war effort with money that is “not charity,” but an “investment” in global security and democracy.
The whirlwind stop in Washington — his first known trip outside his country since Russia invaded in February — was aimed at reinvigorating support for his country in the U.S. and around the world at a time when there is concern that allies are growing weary of the costly war and its disruption to global food and energy supplies.
Zelenskyy called the tens of billions of dollars in U.S. military and economic assistance provided over the past year vital to Ukraine’s efforts to beat back Russia and appealed for even more in the future.
“Your money is not charity,” he sought to reassure both those in the room and those watching at home. “It’s an investment in the global security and democracy that we handle in the most responsible way.”
In fairness, we have a long track record of sticking our noses in conflicts where we didn't belong. Generally, the peacenicks of the left whined about it while accusing the GOP of being warmongers and blaming the "military industrial complex" for profiting from death.
What changed?
How did the Russian invasion of Ukraine become a "holy war" of sorts for the Democrats in 2022? Why are GOP House members cheering like school girls at a pep rally?
Do we really believe that by arming the Ukranians we are spreading democracy?
Do we really beleive that lacking our support The Russians would roll on Kiev and just keep going until they run out of real estate at the Aegean and Adriatic? Is this really "imperialist Russia"?
Here is where the nonthinkers on the board accuse me of being a "Putin supporter". That is not the case. Not sending billions to fight a proxy war in the armpit of the old Soviet Empire is not tacit support of a cold war relic.
24
Posted on 12/22/22 at 8:48 am to Wildcat1996
I remember when it was a conspiracy theory that the U.S. is involved in a proxy war there. Those were good times.
Posted on 12/22/22 at 8:49 am to Wildcat1996
quote:good luck with that.
I wanted to have a political discussion, not some specultive bullshite about "every person in congress is getting paid" without a shred of evidence.
Just for shits and giggles, watch the reaction to this:
quote:
It seems possible that someone in Congress might think that containing Russian aggression is in the best interest of the United States.
This post was edited on 12/22/22 at 8:53 am
Posted on 12/22/22 at 8:49 am to Wildcat1996
To give the OT posters glee.
If I could carpet bomb that forum, I would.
If I could carpet bomb that forum, I would.
Posted on 12/22/22 at 8:49 am to Wildcat1996
Because they launder our money back to themselves through that side.
Posted on 12/22/22 at 8:49 am to Wildcat1996
quote:
Why in the world is the House openly taking a side in a foreign war?
Did you need this political theater yesterday to clue you in on what side they were taking?
Posted on 12/22/22 at 8:50 am to Wildcat1996
(no message)
This post was edited on 12/21/23 at 1:44 pm
Posted on 12/22/22 at 8:52 am to Wildcat1996
Its Americas war. Its a proxy war
Its been that way since at least 2014
Its been that way since at least 2014
Posted on 12/22/22 at 8:53 am to Wildcat1996
quote:
Do we really beleive that lacking our support The Russians would roll on Kiev and just keep going until they run out of real estate at the Aegean and Adriatic? Is this really "imperialist Russia"?
There isn't much reason to believe that they wouldn't continue to expand. Not all at once but gradually as they have been doing.
Posted on 12/22/22 at 8:57 am to Wildcat1996
My feeling is that Americans tend to support underdogs and the aggressed upon in wars.
This is certainly not absolute, but that has generally held true.
The case of Russia-Ukraine was easy. A dictator, well known to murder political opponents, seen a bully with a much larger army began an unprovoked war of conquest against a smaller and weaker neighboring country. His continued strikes against civilian targets has solidified that view.
This is certainly not absolute, but that has generally held true.
The case of Russia-Ukraine was easy. A dictator, well known to murder political opponents, seen a bully with a much larger army began an unprovoked war of conquest against a smaller and weaker neighboring country. His continued strikes against civilian targets has solidified that view.
Posted on 12/22/22 at 8:57 am to Wildcat1996
quote:
Do we really believe that by arming the Ukranians we are spreading democracy?
It's not democracy. It's trade.
This is about the EU and Russia's multi-decade quest to prevent Ukraine from joining the EU.
That would be the nail in the coffin for Russia.
Posted on 12/22/22 at 8:58 am to Wildcat1996
Just another in a long line of wars that we were forced into based on lies.
Posted on 12/22/22 at 9:00 am to Wildcat1996
We know both families on sides of the political aisle in DC have made money in the past through things like NGOs, board appointments, etc. in Ukraine, with much of the money coming from the US federal government coffers.
Risking a Russian takeover of Ukraine not only takes this cash cow off the board for some, it potentially exposes members of Congress by allowing Putin to get full and unfettered access to all of the financial and communications data from these sources. That means leverage.
A non-monetary reason is that Congress has abysmal approval numbers and supporting Ukraine as a proxy in a war against Russia allows them to attempt to cloak themselves in the glory of waging war without actually having to put their lives or those of their kids, friends, etc. at risk.
Risking a Russian takeover of Ukraine not only takes this cash cow off the board for some, it potentially exposes members of Congress by allowing Putin to get full and unfettered access to all of the financial and communications data from these sources. That means leverage.
A non-monetary reason is that Congress has abysmal approval numbers and supporting Ukraine as a proxy in a war against Russia allows them to attempt to cloak themselves in the glory of waging war without actually having to put their lives or those of their kids, friends, etc. at risk.
Posted on 12/22/22 at 9:03 am to Wildcat1996
quote:
What changed?
The whores are calling the shots.
Posted on 12/22/22 at 9:04 am to Wildcat1996
Perhaps for the same reason they have in every foreign war since our nation was founded.
Posted on 12/22/22 at 9:06 am to Wildcat1996
...aaaaaand this aged terribly.
This post was edited on 12/22/22 at 9:07 am
Posted on 12/22/22 at 9:06 am to Wildcat1996
quote:
Why in the world is the House openly taking a side in a foreign war?
Because the United States is an empire and the world's police, as it makes the political class and their allies a ton of money.
Posted on 12/22/22 at 9:08 am to Wildcat1996
quote:
Why are GOP House members cheering like school girls at a pep rally?
I think a certain percentage of them, the ones that are not career politicians with lots of chips in the game, are getting strong-armed, more-so if there are game-changing funding strings attached to their districts.
They are cheering, but they don't like it.
Posted on 12/22/22 at 9:18 am to Wildcat1996
to keep cheap oil going to china.
Posted on 12/22/22 at 9:48 am to Wildcat1996
WW1 and WW2 showed that isolationism wasn't feasible US foreign policy in the 20th century. Technology had made the world too interconnected for the US to take a hands-off approach. The US has intervened by providing foreign military aid, and sometimes bodies, in dozens of conflicts since then, including multiple conflicts against China and Russia. Both have done the same to us as well.
This war is unique primarily due to the scale of Russia's attack, the geographical location, the level of destruction, and the actors involved.
From a strictly geopolitical (NOT moral) standpoint, supporting Ukraine has allowed the US et all to limit the conflict to the southern and eastern portions of Ukraine, and prevented Russia from moving to the Romanian, Moldovan, Polish, and Slovakian borders.
It's also severely damaged Russia's capacity to wage war, and probably weakened Putin politically as well.
It has also strengthened resolve of the NATO members, and will have long-lasting effects on training and readiness (see German and Polish expansion of military).
I think that is a small portion of the WHY. That isn't all inclusive; I'm sure a book could be written about it by someone a lot smarter and more knowledgeable than me.
This war is unique primarily due to the scale of Russia's attack, the geographical location, the level of destruction, and the actors involved.
From a strictly geopolitical (NOT moral) standpoint, supporting Ukraine has allowed the US et all to limit the conflict to the southern and eastern portions of Ukraine, and prevented Russia from moving to the Romanian, Moldovan, Polish, and Slovakian borders.
It's also severely damaged Russia's capacity to wage war, and probably weakened Putin politically as well.
It has also strengthened resolve of the NATO members, and will have long-lasting effects on training and readiness (see German and Polish expansion of military).
I think that is a small portion of the WHY. That isn't all inclusive; I'm sure a book could be written about it by someone a lot smarter and more knowledgeable than me.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News