It's time for the US to stop supporting the war in Ukraine

[AgnosticBoy]

As with any controversial view, I find it helpful to preface my statements to tamp down on any pushback for simply offering an unpopular view (eventhough it's possible for the unpopular view to be backed by evidence). I strongly accept that Russia was in the wrong to invade Ukraine. I also believe that Ukraine is in the right to defend itself. Given all of that, I think that it has come to a time for the US to stop supporting Ukraine's war efforts. I also would say that we should focus our efforts on a peace deal.

There are two main reasons I take my position. The first reason is that I don't believe that we are doing everything we can to help Ukraine win. If we really wanted Ukraine to win, then we would make them a member of NATO and/or send them all of the weapons and manpower that they need to repel Russia. Thus far, we have not done so. We are trying to win the hard way, on Putin's terms, it seems. These actions amount to a political war, and not a real fight. I suspect Ukraine would say the same but they fear biting the hand that feeds them.

Another reason for my position is that the US does not have an endless amount of resources and money. It seems that the US is willing to spend whatever it takes to support an entire country while we are not doing the same for our own country. The more Russia destroys Ukrainian infrastructure, then the more we have to spend. . Sure, some government officials may say that we're not sending that much, but that is only up to the point that people, including the American citizens, start to complain or that this becomes unpopular. Recent polls are starting to show some wavering in the support for funding Ukraine. Here's a CNN report on that:

Overall, 55% say the US Congress should not authorize additional funding to support Ukraine vs. 45% who say Congress should authorize such funding. And 51% say that the US has already done enough to help Ukraine while 48% say it should do more. A poll conducted in the early days of the Russian invasion in late February 2022 found 62% who felt the US should have been doing more.

As more time goes on, I can see this war having less and less support. I can also come up with 5 or more things that America should be spending much more on but they aren't. Mental health is one big example. We should be willing to open the bank to pay whatever it would take to significantly address that issue. Sending billions away to a seemingly endless/unwinnable war doesn't help.


For Debate...
Do you agree that we should stop supporting the War in Ukraine? Are the above reasons reasonable? Your thoughts, please!

 

[AgnosticBoy]

Here are some facts about the US aid to Ukraine:

 

[AgnosticBoy]

For Debate...
Do you agree that we should stop supporting the War in Ukraine? Are the above reasons reasonable? Your thoughts, please!

My thoughts below goes more towards my second point above regarding limited resources and money:

I remember reading some reports that U.S. support to Ukraine amounts to a small percentage of the total amount of foreign aid spending. But I think if we add up all of these small percentage things, then that would amount to a lot of money that we could be spending in the US. I think of this as someone having a lot of monthly expenses but then not seeing that as a problem because it's made up of a lot of small expenses (5 or more credit cards, insurance, rent, and on and on). You gotta cut somewhere!

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

The first reason is that I don't believe that we are doing everything we can to help Ukraine win.

That would risk a major showdown with Russia, which could escalate and possibly nukes could fly.

On the other hand, slowing down Russia and making them pay a price is a more cautious, conservative approach. And maybe . . . is the best package of risk and reward currently available to us.

And in the long-term, heck yeah, I’m in favor us helping to broker a deal, probably through some 3rd party country not super involved in the active conflict.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

On the other hand, slowing down Russia and making them pay a price is a more cautious, conservative approach. And maybe . . . is the best package of risk and reward currently available to us.

Don't agree 100% but I still see it as a good perspective to keep in mind. It explains a lot of the behavior of the Western nations supporting Ukraine, but I question if it is right. Ukraine would be thinking that they need to win as strong and as fast as possible. A prolonged war would increase the amount of suffering and casualties. But ultimately, I question if any of these scenarios would lead to a win in Ukraine. In the OP, I took a win to be where Ukraine wins the war by driving Russia out of Ukraine. But if "win" to Western leaders is just a matter of slowing down Russia and making it hard on them, then I'd personally question even more if it is worth it. Some questions I'd want answered is does it make us any safer? Are we even in immediate harm?

 

[2Dbunk1]

I agree with M. L. Our's is a good strategy -- Hardly ideal -- but it resonates with history. Great Britain used that strategy, funding European nations allied against Napoleon. And we did the same thing in WW2, funding Russia to keep the Germans tied up on the Eastern Front (Roosevelt's lend lease program).

$76.8 billion is a drop in the bucket when compared with the trillions spent in the two G W Bush wars, with thousands of American lives lost to boot, and for what? The above mentioned fundings cost no American or British lives (until Waterloo in the latter) and helped drain the coffers of the enemy. Make no mistake, Putin is another Hitler and must be made as uncomfortable as possible! He is a threat to the World!!

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

Make no mistake, Putin is another Hitler and must be made as uncomfortable as possible! He is a threat to the World!!

Okay, I was 27-years-old during the build-up to the Persian Gulf War in 1990. And Saddam Hussein of Iraq was compared to Adolf Hitler.

The war on Our Side including bombing an air raid shelter by mistake, another incident in which Iraq lied about us bombing a supposed baby milk factory, us bombing withdrawing Iraq troops from Kuwait, President Bush calling upon the people of Iraq to rise up in rebellion and then not supporting them when they did so. I think the Iraqi people called this “Chapter 3.” Bush can point out that he never promised to, but I guarantee you, that part is lost in the wind, especially from the perspective of the average Iraqi citizen.

And the aftermath included another 12 years of economic sanctions, which hurt children most of all. Another war which started in 2003, with us occupying Iraq and breaking apart and sowing to the winds both the Baath party and the Iraqi military. And yeah, in 20-20 hindsight, that part was probably a mistake. And we in the U.S. did military patrols which probably acted as a magnet [again, with 20-20 hindsight].

So anyway, I hope you might agree that even if the top guy [or gal] of the other side is a really bad tyrant, there are still a lot of questions to be asked. Exit strategy is maybe just the beginning of these.

 

[2Dbunk1]

Okay, I was 27-years-old during the build-up to the Persian Gulf War in 1990. And Saddam Hussein of Iraq was compared to Adolf Hitler.

A lot of people have been compared to Hitler, including our prior president. But Saddam was a two-bit dictator with no grandiose plans to conquer the world -- nothing in comparison to Putin who has the largest stockpile of nuclear weapons on the world stage.

There is no exit strategy needed since we have no combatants in Ukraine. But I need to remind you that there were no exit strategies planned for Iraq or Afghanistan. (If you remember, we were going to get unlimited oil from the former and unlimited reverence to our way of life from the latter).

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

nothing in comparison to Putin who has the largest stockpile of nuclear weapons on the world stage.

I think luckily 2nd biggest, second to us here in the United States. Of course, we both have a veritable butt load.

Keep the war conventional, that’s what I say.

I’m guessing that you and I share a lot of agreement. And the biggest obstacle is probably the so-called “Freedom Caucus” Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives who want to cut Ukraine loose. Basically because they think it’s going to help Donald Trump. And that seems to be the extent of their calculus.

For example, the latest compromise budget on Sept 30 to avoid a government shutdown included NO money for Ukraine.

The “Freedom Caucus” includes at least 45 members out of the 222 in the House, and therefore should not be under-estimated. Even if they are so right-wing that they’ve left conservatism behind!

 

[2Dbunk1]

Russia is the country with the most nuclear weapons in the world. According to the Federation of American Scientists, Russia possesses approximately 5,977 nuclear warheads, including both deployed and non-deployed weapons. This represents almost 50% of the world's total nuclear weapons stockpile. Google for the info: Animated Chart: Nuclear Warheads by Country (1945-2022).

I guess the Freedom Caucus will try to remove Speaker Mc Carthy this week.