NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg is proposing to establish a fund of allied contributions worth $100 billion over five years for Ukraine as part of a package for alliance leaders to sign off when they gather in Washington in July.
How is the US justified to meddle in the politics of countries on the other side of the planet? What would the US do if china was giving money to Mexico or Cuba?
What would be the problem with China giving money to Cuba and Mexico?
The problem is that the US would not allow it. Every country is going to ask for aid or alliance, why does that mean that we should help or join in alliance with them?
Cuba was/is under Russian control not China. China and Russia were in a cold war for decades. The Soviet Union did give money to Cuba. The only complaint the US had was when Soviets installed missiles in Cuba.
Cuba was completely supported by the Soviet Union with billions in economic aid and hundreds of millions in military aid every year.
“From 1976 to 1980, the Soviets invested US$1.7 billion on the construction and remodeling of Cuban factories and industry. Between 1981 and 1984 Cuba also received approximately US$750 million a year in Soviet military assistance.”
The US freaked out after the USSR gave Cuba money AND installed missiles there. It sure must be the money that freaked the US out, it can’t possibly be the missiles pointed directly at he US, that wouldn’t make any sense.
Because they do the right thing this time. What is wrong with helping a country defend itself from an agressor? I know the US does and has done shitty things, that does not mean that everything the US does is bad.
I remember this episode of DS9. The genetically enhanced humans do the math and figure out by surrendering to the Dominion the Federation would save billions of lives not fighting a war they never had a hope of winning.
But, spoilers, the Federation did win the war in the end. And the genetically enhanced super smart humans who mathematically proved surrender and submission was the best strategy were kept locked up like weird little freaks.
Ukraine has managed to do a lot in this war: they have repelled Russia’s attack on Kyiv, despite expectations and even pulled of two succesful counteroffensives. (I am talking about Charkiw and Kherson.) I know Ukraine is in a bad spot but that doesn’t mean that it’s over for them.
If they don’t want to negotiate and would rather fight, then why should we tell them they shouldn’t and instead should negotiate with the agressor? And why should we believe that Russia won’t violate such a deal? Their track-record isn’t great in this regard.
Wikipedia says that the Ukrainian armed forces consists of 1000000 armed personell. Compared to Russia’s 1320000. I don’t know the relevancy of this, but hey, I answered your question, now you answer mine.
And all those victories came at a cost and that cost being that their average soldier is in their 40s, and they had to increase their draft. We never know for certain the outcome of a peace deal, but reason russia invaded is well known, and if the west had not gotten involved in the situation the war would have never started, and they dont actually want to invade Ukraine.
My question was not how big their armies are, it was how many people are CONSCIRPTED in their army? Meaning how many war slaves are they using?
Victories coming at a cost is not something new and info on how severe they are is hard to come by due to the fog of war. So unless you have a decent source, this point is kind of useless.
What good reason does Russia have for it’s full scale invasion?
And next: I don’t know why I should be the one looking up how many conscripts Ukraine has when it is your argument. Why don’t you look it up yourself?
And what should the west do to protect themselves form Russian aggression in your eyes? If this is not the right way to do it.
How is the US justified to meddle in the politics of countries on the other side of the planet? What would the US do if china was giving money to Mexico or Cuba?
Because Ukraine asked.
What would be the problem with China giving money to Cuba and Mexico?
The problem is that the US would not allow it. Every country is going to ask for aid or alliance, why does that mean that we should help or join in alliance with them?
Cuba was/is under Russian control not China. China and Russia were in a cold war for decades. The Soviet Union did give money to Cuba. The only complaint the US had was when Soviets installed missiles in Cuba.
China does give money to Mexico.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mexico-china-refinery/chinesebanks-providing-financing-for-mexican-refinery-ambassador-idUSKBN1ZC2FM/#:~:text=MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - Chinese,to Mexico said on Monday.
https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/chinas-role-latin-america-santa-claus-or-debt-collector#:~:text=For example%2C Ecuador%2C which restructured,reportedly owes China %2419 billion.
Free trade is not the same as the US literally giving ukraine tens or hundreds of billions in military aid…
Cuba was completely supported by the Soviet Union with billions in economic aid and hundreds of millions in military aid every year.
“From 1976 to 1980, the Soviets invested US$1.7 billion on the construction and remodeling of Cuban factories and industry. Between 1981 and 1984 Cuba also received approximately US$750 million a year in Soviet military assistance.”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuba–Soviet_Union_relations#:~:text=From 1976 to 1980%2C the,year in Soviet military assistance.
Exactly, and the US freaked out and almost went to nuclear war over it.
The US freaked out after the USSR gave Cuba money AND installed missiles there. It sure must be the money that freaked the US out, it can’t possibly be the missiles pointed directly at he US, that wouldn’t make any sense.
/s just in case.
So then Russia shouldnt freak out over weapons given directly to Ukraine to fight them?
Yeah, because back then the US gave long range missiles to Italy and Turkey. The Cuban Missiles were a response to the US’s aggression.
You said the US would freak out if the Soviets gave money to Cuba. But the Soviets did give money.
The long range missiles in the 1960’s are a separate issue from military aid. The aid I linked was from the 70’s to 80’s.
Even now the US still won’t give Ukraine long range missiles.
Yeah, because when the US gave long range missiles to Italy and Turkey it led to the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Because they do the right thing this time. What is wrong with helping a country defend itself from an agressor? I know the US does and has done shitty things, that does not mean that everything the US does is bad.
What if it harms Ukraine to give them the funding?
What makes you think that’s the case? It looks like the ukrainians would rather fight russia instead of being conquered again.
Because Ukraine is going to lose, and funding them only leads to a longer war and enables them not to negotiate.
And its easy to say they would rather fight, but the question you should look up is; how many people are conscripted in their army?
I remember this episode of DS9. The genetically enhanced humans do the math and figure out by surrendering to the Dominion the Federation would save billions of lives not fighting a war they never had a hope of winning.
But, spoilers, the Federation did win the war in the end. And the genetically enhanced super smart humans who mathematically proved surrender and submission was the best strategy were kept locked up like weird little freaks.
Cool, but we live in reality not a TV show…
Yet you’re still weird little freak, curious
Ukraine has managed to do a lot in this war: they have repelled Russia’s attack on Kyiv, despite expectations and even pulled of two succesful counteroffensives. (I am talking about Charkiw and Kherson.) I know Ukraine is in a bad spot but that doesn’t mean that it’s over for them.
If they don’t want to negotiate and would rather fight, then why should we tell them they shouldn’t and instead should negotiate with the agressor? And why should we believe that Russia won’t violate such a deal? Their track-record isn’t great in this regard.
Wikipedia says that the Ukrainian armed forces consists of 1000000 armed personell. Compared to Russia’s 1320000. I don’t know the relevancy of this, but hey, I answered your question, now you answer mine.
And all those victories came at a cost and that cost being that their average soldier is in their 40s, and they had to increase their draft. We never know for certain the outcome of a peace deal, but reason russia invaded is well known, and if the west had not gotten involved in the situation the war would have never started, and they dont actually want to invade Ukraine.
My question was not how big their armies are, it was how many people are CONSCIRPTED in their army? Meaning how many war slaves are they using?
Victories coming at a cost is not something new and info on how severe they are is hard to come by due to the fog of war. So unless you have a decent source, this point is kind of useless.
What good reason does Russia have for it’s full scale invasion?
And next: I don’t know why I should be the one looking up how many conscripts Ukraine has when it is your argument. Why don’t you look it up yourself?
And what should the west do to protect themselves form Russian aggression in your eyes? If this is not the right way to do it.
Would you rather get conscripted as a Ukrainian defending against Russia or get conscripted as a Russian to invade Poland?
That’s the choice Ukrainians are facing.
“What if it harms someone with an infection to give them antibiotics?” you’re a fucking joke xD go back to ruzzia cunt
If you dont understand, just ask a clarifying question, dont just be a douche showing you lack of understanding.
I’m glad I unblocked you to see if you had an answer, it’s just as stupid and obviously trollish as I thought. Have a shit day!
Oh no you blocked me!!!