Russia - threadbanned users in OP

I totally agree (as a non US citizen) but I think it's important for people to understand that there is no magic money tree. Someone has to pay for all the aid given to other countries and that in the end is the tax payer and consumers. It's easy to say that the US, the EU or Ireland should give them everything they need but in the end someone has to pay and every penny paid is a penny that cannot be invested elsewhere.

With all that said, I fully back the EU, the US or any country supplying weapons to Ukraine. It has to be shown that the invasion of a country for expansion and/or a resource grab is not acceptable and will come at a heavy price to the attacker.

Just looking at the numbers for the USA economy at the same time is also relevant as the largest economy of one country in the world with a gross annual national product of over 25trillion dollars the new aid bill for Ukraine to assist it in its struggle against putin's terrorists amounts to less than a quarter of a percent of the GNP figure. The benefits to the US economy in sales of what it produces directly to Ukraine and also with a potential for an improved world economic outlook with a reduced threat from an expansionist military/terrorist nation then this investment could pay back financially to the USA multiple times over particularly if it helps bring peace back to eastern Europe where the USA has an interest in growing trade. It might be a marginal cost to tax payers in the USA this year that will very likely lead to economic growth that would lead to a lower tax burden on US tax payers in years to come.

So, for the umpteenth time, what does this "peace" look like, in your eyes?

Seems like Chasiv Yar is in trouble. There's been footage of russian SU34s flying overhead providing close air support with impunity.

Sooner the aid (assuming AA ammo included) arrives, the better.

I think we've got it at this stage. You're delighted Ukraine is getting weapons but you're inordinately concerned about the USA balancing its books in the long term.

Ok one last reply. I am concerned about the USA's long term economic health, yes. They are a global powerhouse and could plunge the world into a major recession were they to get into major financial difficulty. That would impact global security and more wars would result.

I presume you're all over the Donald Trump thread so, what with his unfunded tax cuts for billionaires?

Why would China want to destroy europe?

This really is a conversation for another thread (and another forum really) but large economies that have their own central banks are not pocket books. Everything doesn't need to add up and everything doesn't need to be paid back. All of that debt that the Americans have accumulated will never be paid back fully.

A certain type of politician (usually a Republican) brings it up as an excuse when something that they don't wish to fund gets proposed. When it comes to tax cuts that disproportionately benefit the wealthy (such as Trump's only major piece of legislation which cost $1.9 Trillion over 10 years) they suddenly aren't bothered about the national debt.

I don't buy this.

We're not in a world war. Countries the far side of globe have no more care for the war in Ukraine than European countries during the gulf wars. Saying that China is allied to Russia because they're profiteering from the war is an incorrect analysis I believe.

If the Russians really are behind any of these parties they haven't been spending their money well

The political activist and former top Trump advisor, Steve Bannon, has openly talked about how he's helping prop up right wing movements throughout Europe.

There's probably more than just Russia who would like to see Europe lapse into right-wing authoritarianism. Not that it matters as this should be resisted whoever is trying to push it because the 'solution' it offers is worse than the problems it claims it would solve when all is said and done.

We can see that pretty much every pro-Russian agitator in the West won't actually go live in Russia. What they admire about the place is the embedded in-group/out-group dynamic. Something they hope to replicate in their respective home countries.

I'm not an expert on drawing up peace accords.

But, if you had asked me at the back end of the troubles on this Island, would I favour the continuation of hostilities or perhaps giving peace a try? Of course, the answer is obvious. The violence was taking us nowhere.

And I feel the same about this conflict. The Ukrainians have hit a dead end here, and it's very unlikely that they're going to reclaim these annexed territories now. The Russians are just too strong. More war will only bring more human misery, without any realistic chance of Ukraine securing their objectives.

The west should really be encouraging Ukraine to embrace peace talks, rather than pushing for another endless conflict.

I earlier made a proposal for peace that was commented on here. What's your proposal, we're not asking you to draw up accords. What terms would you endorse? This isn't that difficult.

Unless, you know, you're afraid of being criticized for it.

Fu.

Cking.

Hell.