It's obvious, and either many congressmen are an agent of a foreign power, or are truly dumb enough to not realize the unspoken obviousness of this simple fact.

Prefix: I ended up ranting/venting a bit... our government is so frustrating at times:

From a US perspective, it is more a time for other countries to step up in this regard (as they have been), as while continued funding and support from the US will happen, it may be a long time from the US (maybe even 2 to 4 years if this election cycle doesn't oust/block some of these nutjobs that are either beholden to outside powers, or don't understand anything outside our own borders).

I'll take this time to say what many keep unspoken, because Ukrainians have the balls to actually voice it to the world:

No offense to Ukrainians, I want them to win, but even a loss in Ukraine after a sustained long drawn out battle, is of benefit to any country Russia considers an adversary, a place to oppress, or a country were attractive resources. Ukraine should be supported in their opposition to this invasion for as many years as it takes, no matter what. Twenty years, fifty years, however long; there should be no metric of 'it's been 2 years, and Ukraine hasn't won; are they just wasting our money?'. That is just a dumb concept.

[+] brain_in_a_box@lemmy.ml 17 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

[removed by mod]

[–] Tinidril@midwest.social 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Saying that foreign agents control your politicians is far more damning of those politicians and your country than it is of the foreign agents. Foreign agents are supposed to try to influence the politicians, and the politicians are supposed to resist that influence. One group is doing their job, and the other isn't.

[–] HakFoo@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I'm not sure we should be dismissive of politicians trying to reduce interventionist foreign pokicy in the abstract. The "US as world police" paradigm is a difficult angle.

From the US perspective, it's expensive AF, delivers erratic results (see Iraq) and it's created a lot of enemies over the years, basically handing Russia and China a support base on a silver platter.

On a global level, it does seem a bit weird for everyone to come calling to one nation for support, which doesn't really encourage a multi-voiced and spirited debate if everything breaks down to "whoever has US backing wins".

There's definitely a "we wrote a cheque we no longer want to cash" lock-in factor on this conflict, but maybe it's also time to stop writing so many cheques.

[–] Truck_kun@beehaw.org -3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Unless all countries come together, the idea of a 'world police' by any number of select countries is silly.

One nation being the 'world police' is even crazier.

We rely on coalitions nowadays to do much (Iraq, Haiti, Yemen, ....maybe Yemen again soon..., etc).

Coalitions are better than a single nation, but should really be an organization independent of any nations, that people trust; in the modern world, ideally would be the UN, which has peacekeeping forces, but I don't know if the trust is currently there with the UN, and a number of 'bad actors', namely because the UN doesn't serve that purpose, it is supposed to be a dialog between nations, not a unifying power, or protector/military force.

The good news on the US front, is for many coalitions to step in, the US is trying to take a back-seat, and have other nations lead them. Not that those other nations don't have concerns. I'm not up to date on it, but I believe Kenya was being sought to lead the coalition to Haiti to restore peace and order, but I believe there were concerns about the history of Kenyan police treatment in past coalitions. Still, the US should not be the one in-charge of world policing, though that is not to say they shouldn't be involved in any such action, just they are a piece of the puzzle, not the solution in and of itself.

I'm rambling too much. I think it's time for me to get off Lemmy for the day. Peace out.

[–] PanArab@lemmy.ml 37 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Every weapon sent to Ukraine is a weapon not dropped on Palestinians

The west should exhaust its ammunitions somewhere else other than the Middle East

I’m ashamed that my government hasn’t cut oil production. We are overdue for another oil embargo

[–] gun@lemmy.ml -5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

*Narrator voice*
They didn't finish the job

[–] Reddfugee42@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Russia is resorting conscripting seniors and prisoners and putting them in 50 year old tanks with faulty ammo but do go on 😅

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

We've been reading this shit for two years. At this point we're coping as much propaganda as the Russians are.

Even with 500.000 Russian soldiers dead, their population is 143 million people. I'm quite sure that they still have some spare Blyats lying around.

[–] kiagam@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

not even if they were facing complete destruction would they conscript even 1% of the population.

Wars end when people get pissed or you run out of money. We are getting closer to that every day for both sides. if ukraine can at least keep getting more money, they eventually win. Ukrainians are the defenders, so their population is willing to fight for longer

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Don't look up the amount of Russian casualties in WW2.

Ukranians are getting forced into military draft too. I'm quite sure a large part of the Ukranians aren't willing to risk their lives for their country either. But you seem to have no problem sacrificing them as if they are funny peons you can throw at Russians.

Wonder how much you would support this if you were the one that was forced to go to the front line. You can volunteer to go to Ukraine and fight against the Russians yourself by the way.

[–] kiagam@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Exactly, when Russia was being invaded, they lost a ton of people to defend their land. Doesn't mean they died willingly (people were drafted against their will, in every war in history that happens), but the pressure to surrender didn't mount up on the government. In a defensive war, people are more willing to die and to let their fellow citizens die. There are always people clamoring for an agreement or a surrender to avoid loss of life, but those voices are few compared to the ones who want to defend their land (or want others to go do it).

In a war of aggression however, every death come with a "why the fuck are we attacking them anyway? why did my son/brother/cousin have to die?". USA lost in vietnam that way. More kills, more money, won basically every engagement and still lost the war. If the population is against a war of aggression, it will end.

Very few wars end in complete domination of the enemy. Most end in an agreement of some sort or a retreat. I believe that, if Ukraine keeps getting money to stay in the fight, they will outlast Russia in political willingness to fight and will recover their land.

[+] nekandro@lemmy.ml -92 points 2 years ago (7 children)

This is just Zelenskyi's government in Kyiv sacrificing everyone else to maintain the notion of a Ukrainian state for the wealthy elite who (coincidentally) live in Kyiv. Look at where the rich are. Look at where most conscripts are from.

Ukraine is split into the ultra wealthy (Kyiv), the moderately well-off (Dnipro, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, Kharkiv), and everywhere else (which is remarkably poor). Kyiv has more than double the GDP/capita of the next richest administrative region. This war devastates the eastern economic centers and solidifies power in Kyiv... And for what?

Ukrainian nationalism have sent hundreds of thousands of men and women to their death for no clear gains. Now, they want to send hundreds of thousands more, because the lives of Ukrainians mean nothing to the people in the white ivory towers of Kyiv. Is the sacrifice of more Ukrainian lives worth it to pursue the Western ideal of crushing Russia (so that the West can collectively focus on the Middle East and China instead)?

[–] TheDoozer@lemmy.world 61 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Ukraine isn't fighting "crush Russia" or "consolidate power," they are fighting to exist as a nation. They are fighting to not be part of Russia, and if you claim Russia doesn't consolidate wealth into a small few while sacrificing their poor as cannon fodder, you're unabashedly lying.

Now, do Western nations take advantage of this to severely weaken with no personal loss of life or territory? Absolutely. But just because it benefits the West doesn't mean it doesn't also benefit Ukraine.

[–] havocpants@lemm.ee 50 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Oh, it's Ukrainian nationalism causing the deaths is it, not Russia invading? Do you really believe such obvious bullshit and lies?

[–] Tinidril@midwest.social 9 points 2 years ago

Well, if Ukraine didn't stubbornly insist on remaining a nation, there wouldn't be any fighting. Checkmate western scum. /s

[–] BloodSlut@lemmy.world 23 points 2 years ago (1 children)

so they should just become putin's bitchboys instead?

[–] wildncrazyguy@kbin.social 20 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Uh, because they are all within one nation. They identify as Ukrainians.

You could transmute your statement to any other nation and it would be the same. Why do the people in Archangelsk fight for Moscow? Why do the people in Wichita fight for Washington?

Tribalism is an innate feature of the human experience.

[–] nekandro@lemmy.ml -3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Despite Taiwan's charter stating very clearly that they are the rightful government of China, the people there identify as Taiwanese.

Oh, oops, I don't think I'm supposed to find contradictions.

[–] wildncrazyguy@kbin.social 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Wow, you’re right! You have found the one chink in my armor that completely tears down my statement!

The Romanovs must all be British now.

The Dalai Lama must be American.

Lana Peters is Russian. So are all Ukrainians and Tatars that were forced to migrate.

Pack it up folks, by the decree of Nekandro, you can never be part of multiple tribes or switch ever!

[–] nekandro@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That was your claim. Thanks for disproving it, I guess?

[–] wildncrazyguy@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I never said that Ukrainians must only identify as Ukrainians, just that it is the reason why folks outside of Kyiv choose to fight. Do not put words into my mouth.

[–] nekandro@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago

Folks out of Kyiv are being forcibly conscripted right now. Jesus, look at Ukrainian social media. It's bleak out there.

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago

Russia started this war shooting elementary schools with tanks and launching rocket strikes on hospitals. Do you really think this is just about "the western ideal" of crushing Russia? If you want to see why Ukraine is fighting so hard to not become part of Russia, just look at how shitty Russia has been to its soldiers and people during this war.

[–] jackpot@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

ukraine has put off counter attacks because the loss of life isnt worth it, they wait so they can get better equipment. compare that to russia who uses it soldiers as meatgrinders