You keep repeating same lies over and over. The red line for Biden was Putin demand of removing all military infrastructure from Eastern european countries. What don't you understand
That is a lot of stuff that is much more pressing than worrying about Ukraine at this point. I was answering the OP's question. We can still be part of NATO. We can advise and help NATO. We just need to get out of the driver seat.
For the United States, it worked out very well and it allowed us to end up where we are today. We provided G&S early in the war and allowed us to ramp up war time production as the conflict got out of control. This surge of support allowed us to overwhelm Germany. War mongers like yourself want to get involved in every conflict at the start. You fail to understand this - Americans are war fatigued right now from decades of conflict. Some of you need to hear this - We do not need to get involved in every conflict. We are not the world police. We do not own the world. Stop acting like it.
The government can actually focus on more things than one. To continue with the baseball analogy the Astros can focus on hitting, pitching and fielding. Over the last two years there has been legislation and regulations that have been passed even though we’ve been helping Ukraine. Right now the biggest impediment to addressing any of those issues you raise is the chaos in the House where they can’t even get a new speaker.
Yes we are war fatigued that’s why we don’t have troops in Ukraine and it is vey unlikely we will. That doesn’t mean we don’t have other interests or we don’t provide aid. Ukraine isn’t the only country the US is providing aid to. I don’t think Biden has been good on every foreign policy or national security but on Ukraine he’s threading the needle between helping Ukraine while keeping it from escalating to where US troops have to go in.
You say the government can focus on one thing but they can't get a house speaker. Further I mentioned half a dozen other serious issues this country has that is being ignored. Its very clear the government can't focus on more than one thing.
US troops are never going into Ukraine.... unless Russia attacks a NATO country, which Russia isn't going to do. The only person trying to get NATO at war with Russia is Zelensky.
And getting a speaker has very little to do with Ukraine. Yes I agree there are a lot of other issues being ignored. There are a lot of other issues being addressed. Just because the issues you care about aren’t getting as much attention you think they should isn’t necessarily about Ukraine but that those issues don’t have as much support. Before Russia invaded Ukraine where those issues getting the attention you thought they deserved?
Right so that means that the US isn’t directly a combatant I this war which undercuts the argument about the US being war weary so we shouldn’t be involved.
We are providing weapons to Ukraine (specifically Zelensky) who is doing his best to escalate the war. I understand Z's game theory. He would rather watch the world burn than allow his country to be conquered. That is **** leadership. NATO, and IMO, Putin, is doing its best to curtail this. Putin's strategy is to weaken NATO by creating internal conflict with hopes that it falls apart. I have little doubt Putin, Iran, N Korea and to some extent China, emboldening Hamas to attack Israel. The more conflicts created, the increased chance NATO gets involved. If NATO falls apart, which there is an increasing probability as the days go on, the world is back at war. NATO only survives if they ALL agree to avoid war and remain a defensive pact. Further, it would be prudent to understand Russia is in survival mode. Containment is more important than complete domination. We tried that with Germany in the 30's and that did not turn out well. Get a new administration in our country, get rid of Zelensky, agree to a cease fire with Putin. Open up trade with Russia again. And turn Germany's idiotic energy policy around (along with the rest of the EU) and push for independency from Russia energy. Remove Russia's only bargaining power, energy, and they will be forced to conform.
No they were not. Its issues that we all have discussed for years. It is time for a new New Deal. The current mindset of politicians is extremely short term. They are more interested in winning elections at this point than anything else. We should be looking at 50-100 year plan instead of 4 year plans.
Fixing problems like providing internet to every household? Providing record amounts of $$ to every regional airport for repair? Providing direct cash $$ to every single state and county in the country for the first time? Removing lead pipes from every community which will save thousands of loves. I can go on and on about this My issue with you is that you're just so illiterate and clueless. You're so bad at debating. If biden was more concerned about getting elected then why did he give Florida more than big blue states ?
FIFY. Just to be clear, you do not support sending Israel $10 billion a year and also do not support sending any additional monies since the Gaza War started, right? Looking for some logical consistency here, since the SCWs are all in on Israel support and are all in not sot supporting Ukraine since the End Time prophecies do not require a Ukrainian nation.
You often make statements like this, yet you complain when someone accuses you of being a Putin supporter. Your reaction comes from the same mindset, just the opposite side - if someone disagrees with you, you label them warmongers, and if someone disagrees with you, they label you a Putin supporter. I strongly agree with your perspective that we need to cease acting as the world's police. In the past, our involvement in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan was questionable. Instead, we should have maintained a specific mission, like eliminating Osama bin Laden, without engaging in extensive nation-building efforts. When we consider involvement, our primary approach should be diplomatic, reserving military action as a last resort. If military engagement becomes necessary, it should occur without direct, unilateral involvement from our military. Participation in significant wars should require congressional approval. That said, we do not intervene in every conflict. Some conflicts, such as Ukraine and the Israeli-Palestinian issue, align with our interests. However, such engagement should not be unconditional. Clear but adaptable objectives and timelines are necessary, and I also believe that the power, responsibility, and oversight of foreign conflicts should be shared between the executive and key members of Congress, rather than resting almost solely with the executive, as it has been for many years. On the other hand, there are conflicts that do not demand our involvement, either militarily or through military aid. These include the internal conflict in Myanmar, the Tigray war, various African conflicts, and the Kashmir conflict between India and Pakistan, among others. We should also exercise caution when considering possible participation in conflicts like the China-Taiwan issue. It's not about perpetual involvement in every conflict or complete avoidance of them. Beyond military action, I advocate for diplomatic engagement in most conflicts. With the current Ukrainian conflict, I think we need to give it more time. The idea that Ukraine has already lost is not a reality. The idea that Russia has already lost is also not a reality. The notion that it's a stalemate forever is also not a reality. I have already seen a shift in strategy from 'we will be involved as long as it takes' to 'we want Ukraine to be self-sufficient in defending themselves.' They need to build up their own capability to supply the weaponry required to sustain a possible very long-term conflict with Russia...
Why does Israel need 10 billion dollars in weapons from the US. (they don't) For the record, I do support humanitarian aide ... if its indeed going to people who need it.
