• @TheClockStruck13@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    21 year ago

    The entire military complex is milking the US taxpayer dollar from this war, if Trump were to stand in the way of the MIC and their income… given the presidential assassinations observed in recent history I would imagine that he would have multiple crosshairs on his forehead:.: it would take an incredible amount of patriotic duty to ignore that risk and pull funding anyway.

      • @TheClockStruck13@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        31 year ago

        Putin has been on Tucker Carlson and remained fairly clear since the beginning that this war is not about killing Ukraine people (in a genocide as you word it)… in fact the genocide is really happening as a result of US influence, Russia has many legitimate reasons to seek unification of Ukraine with Russian interests, I don’t agree with them, but I disagree that it is a US interest to send US taxpayer money to Ukraine for weapons and arms to prolong this war.

        America simply cannot afford to forever siphon money out of the coffers to Ukraine which then purchase weapons and arms which then make the weapons and arms dealers more powerful and wealthy… it’s a wholesale scam, just as we saw in the Middle East… Orwell predicted this, long drawn out pointless wars that suddenly stop when a new war is created. Today we’re told Russia bad guy, tomorrow it might be palestines Hamas, in the future we may see a forever war with China…

        It doesn’t really matter at this point. America just like other allied nations should stay out of other people’s wars. Military tax money should be on a need to have basis only

        • @alienanimals@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          151 year ago

          During the course of the entire war, the US has spent $175 billion helping Ukraine. This might sound like a lot until you realize that in just a single year, the US’ federal budget is $6.5 trillion. So even if we paid for everything all at once, there’s still $6.32 trillion left this year.

          Not to mention most of the money goes back into the American economy. We are spending money on weapons that are largely sitting in warehouses that we would otherwise need to be replaced. Weapons don’t last forever. So for pennies on the dollar we are saving Ukrainian cities from being “liberated” by our cold war enemy that never stopped being our cold war enemy. Sounds like a great investment to me.

          • @TheClockStruck13@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            Yea the idea of “oh we get the money back” or “we have weapons lying around” isn’t selling it to me.

            Also, Russia has nukes… we shouldn’t be tempting WW3. The whole thing is eff’d

  • @Sludgehammer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    241 year ago

    I’m guessing Trump’s plan to end the war is “Back Russia and help Putin crush Ukraine.” Because (much like Trump’s own sycophants) he doesn’t realize that he’ll the first under the bus when his master no longer needs him.

  • defunct_punk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    301 year ago

    The Ukraine War would end within a week without US support. It would take a Trump admin doing literally nothing for the war to end. That’s his plan. To do nothing.

    • @RunawayFixer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      21
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      USA aid is very important to Ukraine, but even without it they would continue fighting. Ukraine has been without USA material aid for months already in the past, when the republican party was blocking it. And as it turned out, Ukraine sustained higher casualties and had less offensive power than with USA aid, but they were never close to folding.

      Ukrainians + their supporting neighbours are very motivated to not be occupied by Russia, so they’re not going to just give up if Putin’s stooges come to power in the USA.

      • @Barbarian@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        131 year ago

        There’s also the fact that a hypothetical end to US aid wouldn’t end EU aid. It’s definitely not on the same scale as the US due to our much smaller military sector, but that’d likely change in the event of a US shut-down of aid.

        In my mind, the most likely results would be:

        Short-term: Very dangerous period for Ukraine, they lose some ground, lots of men (similar to the last time they had a crippling artillery shell shortage).

        Medium-term: EU military sector slowly ramps up to meet demand, as about 3/4 of central & eastern EU considers this an existential war that cannot be lost at any cost.

        Long-term: After the war is over (however many more years that takes), Russia finally negotiates some kind of ceasefire where they can save some face internally and brag about how they “Denazified” Ukraine while going home and accomplishing nothing, EU is much more self-sufficient and therefore buys less from the US, and they aren’t seen as a trust-worthy ally militarily anymore. Even if on paper most EU members are still in NATO, they consider the security guarantees of the EU as much more important and serious.

        • @Valmond@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          41 year ago

          Crippling russian economy might lead to yo a coup, putins death or just his health declining can also lead to instability which can lead to a coup too etc. A soft coup some years down the line for example.

        • @Kaput@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          91 year ago

          Heck, Trump declared Canada, a strategic risk during his s presidency. Just to stop steel imports. No one can consider the USA a reliable ally as long as Maga is around.

    • TooManyFoods
      link
      fedilink
      English
      111 year ago

      We had this conversation in 2016 about beating isis in 30 days. Turned out he lied about the plan. Besides if biden had to follow trumps plan that would mean that it was trumps plan right? It would be a better argument for trump to get into office. It would mean that biden has to do what trump says to get things done.

      The truth is, Trump is lying about having a plan like in 2016. I didn’t fall for it then. I won’t fall for it now. If you’re falling for it again, it’s pathetic.

      • @NoSuchAgency@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 year ago

        Trump did what he said he was going to do, Biden can’t even remember what he said he was going to do. Anyone who thinks Biden should be running things in the US is just living in denial at this point

        • TooManyFoods
          link
          fedilink
          English
          51 year ago

          Weird. He said isis wouldn’t exist 30 days into his presidency almost 8 years ago. Isis still exist. Anyone who says Trump did what he said he was going to do is delusional.

      • @Nasan@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        It’s really telling that they care more about clout than actually doing the things that might make the world a little less shitty. Shameless fraudsters can’t be bothered to do anything useful unless there’s a material reward in it for them.

    • @pikmeir@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      331 year ago

      I, too, love when I get to prevent an entire country from invasion by an evil force, but only when I get to take credit for it. Someone else stealing my idea for peace is just as bad as someone else stealing a joke I said first, if not worse.

      • Flying Squid
        link
        fedilink
        English
        61 year ago

        You’re talking to someone who agreed with SCOTUS’ decision allowing Trump to commit crimes, just so you know where they’re coming from.

  • @Moonrise2473@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    81 year ago

    Like the far right in my country before the elections “We have the solution to fix the economy, vote for us” - without of course saying what they’re going to do.

    Unfortunately, majority of people believed them

    Populism works, people like to vote for someone that says what they want to listen even if it’s obvious that they’re not going to do that

    • @jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      41 year ago

      Generally their playbook is open, it just doesn’t work. Their strategy is to let rich people do whatever they want and hoard as much wealth as they can, and that prosperity obviously will trickle down to everyone.

      However when taxes are relatively higher on the rich and regulations do things like punish them for poisoning a water source, they spend their resources gaslighting the populace into thinking economy is just terrible and if your personal experience does not bear that out, well your just lucky and you’ll be out on the streets in a few months unless you vote right.

  • @Rakonat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    741 year ago

    Same plan he made in Syria and Afghanistan. Abandon US allies in the region, hand over all local assets to hostile forces and leak intel like damn spaghetti strainer.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if he ordered the DoD to hanf over all the intel we have about Ukraine to Russia and withdraw all other support and recon in the area.

    • @small44@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      181 year ago

      The USA, Iran and Russia are responsible for syrian civil war. None should have got involved in it

      • @Rakonat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        481 year ago

        Be as that may be, Trump absolutely selling out the Kurdish Militia that was a long time US ally in the region was not acceptable.

          • Flying Squid
            link
            fedilink
            English
            13
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Imperial powers created Syria. Modern Syria anyway. The entire Middle East has been an Imperial project since colonialism. Pretty much only the Saudis and Israel (and Iran, if you want to count it as Middle Eastern) aren’t on board.

            • Pelicanen
              link
              fedilink
              English
              31 year ago

              I mean, not for lack of trying, they did stage a coup and plant the Shah of Iran as the leader for a while

          • @Apollo42@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            81 year ago

            Of course it had nothing to do with the repressive authoritarian regime killing its own people because they had the temerity to protest.

            • @small44@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              71 year ago

              Of course the usa support rebels because they care about syrians and human life and not because they only cares about their own interest. The usa representing democracy is the number one supported of coups over the world, the country who represent human rights ignores the crimes commited by israel and is allying with saudi arabia. The countries who had revolutions without imperialist powers didn’t fell into a civil war inlike all other revolutions with russia or usa interference.

        • @rayyy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          81 year ago

          Trump absolutely selling out the Kurdish Militia

          Shhh, the MSM isn’t saying anything negative about the orange felon.

      • @chaogomu@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 year ago

        The start of the Syrian civil war had nothing to do with anyone except the Syrian people being pissed off at living under the most restrictive police state in the Arab world. There were protests after a mass arrest and subsequent torture of 15 teenage boys who had spay-painted some anti-government graffiti on some walls around the city.

        Assad cracked down on the protests hard, which led to people saying, “fuck this shit, time for a revolution”.

        Iran started helping Assad, and then the US started helping the rebels. And yeah it’s a shit show now. But no, it would have kicked off without outside help.

        • @small44@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          A lot of people would still have died without outside intervention and syrian had the right to kick of the revolution against asad. I don’t disagree with that but outaide intervation definitely made it a lot worse. Ben ali wasalso very brutal but due to the lack of interests from major powers the revolution in tunisia was relatively very peaceful

          • @chaogomu@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            Again, the context is important. Mostly that the Tunisian military refused to step in and support Wasalo, eventually forcing him to flee.

            Asad on the other hand, is still very popular with his own ethnic group, and draws heavily from them to staff his military. Iran’s help just made things worse.

      • @AbidanYre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        23
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Trump didn’t withdraw from Afghanistan. Biden followed the timeline trump set (with a slight delay, maybe?) and got no end of shit for it.

        Trump negotiated with the Taliban without inviting the Afghan government, and released a bunch of them from prison.

        For fuck’s sake, if you want to shit on liberals at least try and get your talking points right.

        Blue MAGA

        Further proof that you’re an unserious clown.

        • @Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          7
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          My talking points are from reality not from liberal propaganda. Trump retreated the majority of the troops already. Biden finished the retreat. It most definitely started with Trump.

          As part of the United States–Taliban deal, the Trump administration agreed to an initial reduction of US forces from 13,000 to 8,600 troops by July 2020, followed by a complete withdrawal by 1 May 2021, if the Taliban kept its commitments. At the start of the Biden administration, there were 2,500 US soldiers remaining in Afghanistan

          I’m not sure what “Afghan government” you are talking about. The puppets we put in power which were rampantly raping children because we backed them up? As soon as the money was gone the “Afghan government” dissolved within a day. Literally. Those people were not ideologically driven they were just a bunch of corrupt druggies that got a free pass to rape children as long as they obeyed us.

          If you want to dunk on Trump bring up January 6, his Muslim ban or any other of the million stupid things he did, not him retreating from Afghanistan. Talk about talking points…

    • OBJECTION!
      link
      fedilink
      English
      31 year ago

      Liberals will criticize ending a pointless 20 year war and somehow still not realize that they’re jingos.

      • @FatCrab@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        51 year ago

        The criticisms are universally about how he “ended” it. I have seen no one that was in favor of staying. Likewise, Trump gets criticism on betraying our allies because he knowingly and intentionally ratfucked the kurds, or have you totally forgotten about that?

        • @intensely_human@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          21 year ago

          Trump didn’t end the war in Afghanistan. Biden did. The President who determined how that happened was Joe Biden.

          • @irreticent@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            “The Trump administration in February 2020 negotiated a withdrawal agreement with the Taliban that excluded the Afghan government, freed 5,000 imprisoned Taliban soldiers and set a date certain of May 1, 2021, for the final withdrawal.”

            “And the Trump administration kept to the pact, reducing U.S. troop levels from about 13,000 to 2,500, even though the Taliban continued to attack Afghan government forces and welcomed al-Qaeda terrorists into the Taliban leadership.”

            • OBJECTION!
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11 year ago

              “And the Trump administration kept to the pact, reducing U.S. troop levels from about 13,000 to 2,500, even though the Taliban continued to attack Afghan government forces and welcomed al-Qaeda terrorists into the Taliban leadership.”

              So should the withdrawal have been stopped at that point? Exactly how much longer do you think we should’ve stayed in Afghanistan?

        • OBJECTION!
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          And that criticism was always bullshit. There’s no “right” way to retreat, it was always going to play out the way it did. Journalists criticized it in bad faith, because it generated clicks and because they never actually opposed the war, because again, war is great for clicks. In reality, what happened when the US pulled out was the culmination of 20 years spent doing nothing to stabilize the country and only making the Taliban stronger.

          But go ahead then, armchair strategist, and describe to me what specifically could’ve been done differently about the withdrawal that would not have resulted in things playing out the way they did.

          Opposing the withdrawal is the same as supporting the war. The withdrawal was one of the only good things Biden did in his whole career and liberals will never forgive him for it. Worse yet, you want to allow Trump to claim credit for it when Biden’s the one who actually saw it through and had to deal with the flak from it.