this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2023
357 points (89.6% liked)

World News

32298 readers
356 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TheMage@lemmy.ml 22 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Now we’re up to $900 per US household for this Ukraine stuff. Let’s throw a few more bucks at it to buy flags. Great use of taxpayer dollars. Sure, Jan.

[–] PerCarita@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Most of which are armament that the US government already had in its arsenal. You've spent the money and now those missiles are actually in use instead of being hold in storage. I'm actually more interested in that 900 USD amount, where did you read or hear that exact number?

[–] Fuckass@hexbear.net 46 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Who said I preferred it killing people half way across the world instead of rotting in storage

[–] 420blazeit69@hexbear.net 45 points 1 year ago (1 children)
  1. Missiles being used to kill people in an endless stalemate is actually worse than them sitting in a box
  2. The people sending those missiles to Ukraine are going to buy more to replace them
  3. They're also going to charge Ukraine for the missiles and insist the country sell off state assets for pennies on the dollar to make payments
[–] PerCarita@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe it's high time to overhaul that thinking and stop having a ridiculous military budget.

[–] PosadistInevitablity@hexbear.net 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Holy shit, it’s so high because it gets used constantly.

You’re literally here supporting the use of it

Liberal thinkers are epic

[–] AntiOutsideAktion@hexbear.net 41 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I don't know how this brain genius talking point got so popular.

So things don't cost money when you already spent money on them? ...You don't think those stocks are going to be replenished having been depleted?

[–] PosadistInevitablity@hexbear.net 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Wonder why they never apply that logic to housing…

Then it suddenly costs money!

[–] PerCarita@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because it has a point, albeit not perfect. Wouldn't you rather the US not have a ridiculously big military budget and can divert spending to, say, education and healthcare?

Sure, it's great that the US arsenal can obliterate any country in the world should the political powers will it, but this is not the best version of the world, honestly. As you said, it's your money. Are you okay with it?

[–] AntiOutsideAktion@hexbear.net 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sure, it's great that the US arsenal can obliterate any country in the world should the political powers will it

visible-disgust

Wouldn't you rather the US not have a ridiculously big military budget and can divert spending to, say, education and healthcare?

Yes? But this seems like a non sequitur.

You see, we will reduce our military budget by using more weapons. This makes sense in the liberal mind

[–] PosadistInevitablity@hexbear.net 33 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

And now we have to replenish those arsenals… they absolutely will be replenished.

Like, if you give all the food in your cupboard to someone, no one would consider that “free”. You have to buy more food!

This argument seems so foolish I can hardly believe anyone actually thinks this way.

[–] PerCarita@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'd rather the companies in my country stop selling those armaments to the US, actually. Maybe this is a good time to review your military budget and ask your government why you have it in the first place?

[–] PosadistInevitablity@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The same imperial government that lied to its people and provoked a land war in Europe?

The same one you’re legitimizing in fueling that conflict by implying it’s free?

Yeah let me call up my boy Biden and tell him no more bombs while you point and laugh at me from behind

[–] couragethebravedog@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago (10 children)

This conflict has the potential to cause real change in Russia. We're talking about potentially getting rid of Putin's regime and it's being done without sending any of our troops to die. The help Ukraine is getting isn't charity, look at the bigger picture.

[–] Venus@hexbear.net 64 points 1 year ago (3 children)

without sending any of our troops to die

hitler-detector what about all the people from other countries

[–] Tankiedesantski@hexbear.net 45 points 1 year ago

If foreigners are people then why can't they vote in our elections?

Checkmate tankie.

Never mind all the US vets that died over there lmfao

[–] tripartitegraph@hexbear.net 9 points 1 year ago

This person just outing themself as craving the sending of Ukrainians into the fucking meatgrinder. The sheer disregard for human life is disgusting

[–] Tankiedesantski@hexbear.net 42 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If Putin is overthrown the people most likely to overthrow him are hardliners who think he's being a cuck by not immediately nuking Kiev and Washington.

So it's a good thing that there's basically zero indication of major internal political stability in Russia. Even the Wagner "coup" only asked for Shoigu and Gerasimov to be removed, not Putin.

[–] TheBroodian@hexbear.net 38 points 1 year ago

You do realize that America already overthrew Russia's government once, and that is how Putin came to be in the first place, right? You expect cycle #2 to go better?

[–] Fuckass@hexbear.net 35 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Lmao. I’m sure they’ll overthrow the government, just like the Americans did to their own government after invading Vietnam and Iraq. Have you seen what the Russian government is doing to mild protestors? Black bagged, sent off to who knows where, doing who knows what. It’s Kent State by like 500x. This isn’t 1980s USSR. The people there support Putin. And those who don’t and protest are still denounced by the west for not doing enough, as if westerners have ever succeeded in holding their governments accountable.

The most realistic outcome is that Putin resigns in disgrace and 20 years later they make shoot and cry movies about Russian soldiers in Ukraine. And then they’ll rehabilitate Putin as a strong leader anyway.

[–] PosadistInevitablity@hexbear.net 27 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Putin has more support than ever…

For gods sake try to imagine this from a Russian perspective. NATO bombs are killing their people.

Like, seriously, imagine how your average American would react to this. Treat the Russians as human for one fucking second.

They are not going to fucking blame Putin for that. They will blame NATO!!!

[–] AssortedBiscuits@hexbear.net 26 points 1 year ago

We're talking about potentially getting rid of Putin's regime and it's being done without sending any of our troops to die.

The people surrounding Putin who are most likely to replace him are hardliners who think Kiev should be glassed. Part of the motivation behind the Wagner mutiny is Prigo thinking Shoigu isn't going hard enough in Ukraine. Contrary to liberal bots who only listen to what CNN tells them, it's good for everyone involved that the Wagner mutiny was completely deflated. There wouldn't be much of a Ukraine left if Prigo was in charge, and Prigo is not the only one.

[–] Sasuke@hexbear.net 19 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This conflict has the potential to cause real change in Russia

time is a flat circle

[–] very_poggers_gay@hexbear.net 13 points 1 year ago

This is the most important proxy war of our lifetime! joever

We are killing the Russians to help the Russians

[–] Flaps@hexbear.net 7 points 1 year ago

Once again a westoid proves Ukrainian lives don't matter to them.

[–] tired_n_bored@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This Ukraine stuff is a war where 100.000 war crimes were reported, tens of thousands of civilians were killed raped and tortured, where hundreds of thousands of people lost their house.

I wouldn't say it's $900 per household because

  1. It's from the defense federal budget, that you would've spent anyways
  2. The aid packages, expressed in dollars, are the sum of the value of the equipment sent to Ukraine, in vast majority which US already had
  3. The defence budget is there to be able to stand against the strongest adversaries: China and Russia. USA basically annihilated one of their enemies' army without a single drop of blood.