Not to nit pick, but I don't think the Napoleonic wars magically "turned France feminine." 1914 -1918 French Army would take exception to that idea. If anything made the French "reconsider their societal priorities", it was the utter darkness and devastation of WWI, of which they bore the brunt of and was fought largely on their soil, and the subsequent colonial punches in the nose it received, then ultimately getting ran over later in the century when they were still shell shocked. Which gets to the point that some on this thread (apparently) don't get: Empires don't stop empiring until they get their ass beat enough to stop. Russia has yet to learn that lesson and we need to teach them it before China thinks it's ok, too.
America is a country, not an empire. We influence other countries' behaviors through diplomacy and financial incentives, we do not control them at gunpoint. If we have to invade them for whatever reason, we eventually give the country back to them, keeping no more than a tiny percentage of the land for military bases that--get this--makes not only the country but the entire region a safer place. Empires and colonialism went out of fashion during WWII, in case you weren't paying attention in your history classes. And, no, America has not gotten its ass beaten by any other country since Vietnam (thanks to LBJ's idiotic decision to invade). We were unable to control Iraq and Afghanistan, so we could not "win the peace" in those countries, but we certainly won the wars in those countries. Saddam went to his grave never having destroyed a U.S. tank, while losing over 3300 of his own tanks. We do have a difficult time fighting in (or controlling) countries that do not adhere to the Geneva conventions like we do, but that's to be expected. The proxy war in Ukraine was going very well for Ukraine (and the countries supporting her) until a group a small-minded imbeciles in Congress decided to shut down funding for Ukraine, even though that has one of the highest returns of any government investment in the last 35 years. I suspect that you actually know these things, but cannot bring yourself to tell the truth when there are lies and innuendoes to be told. That's sad for you.
You were going pretty good there, til you shat yourself with the 'small minded imbeciles' imbecilty. The almost 200 billions of US dollars was going unaccounted to Zelensky and his bros, and being used to help Ukraine support unnecessary luxury crap, during war time, when our own ppl are doing without... Complete crap. Your small minded imbeciles putting Ukraine's corrupt class over our own American working class, with our American tax dollars. ...and btw, your small minded imbeciles are so committed in their determination to not spend American tax dollars on Americans, that all they had to do to reopen the spigot of Americsn tax dollars to continue funding Ukrainian corruption and cronyism, was to agree to funding for our own border security. Begging the question--why are your small minded imbeciles so invested in undermining our own national border integrity??? Side note: boogeyman Russia has proven to be most unspooky. Gonna be harder and harder to get Americans to agree to fund Z's corruptocracy, as Bidenomics and China Jo's open border continue to yield their delightful fruit... PS--you're also wrong about viet nam. JFK had announced his commitment to VN days b4 his assassination, and we already had 16000 troops in SVN.
Fair point, but they were a juggernaut in Napoleon's day. In WWI, they hunkered down with English support, did no more than hold serve with the Brits against Germany (ditto on reverse) until the US chimed in, and tilted the scales on favor of thr allies.
Congress could easily continue funding weapons and ammunition shipments to Ukraine, without funding cash shipments to the country. They chose not to. And your numbers are totally off. The article quoted below was written on Oct. 1st of this year, with spending through July of this year. Financial support is shown as $26.4B. Military aid is shown as $46.6B (which includes $4.7B for purchasing weapons from other countries, with the rest being weapons and ammo or training). Your "almost $200 billion" appears to be closer to $77 billion in total aid, with only $31.1 billion in cash aid. It's unlikely that the majority of that cash is being taken by corrupt politicians--do you have any evidence of that? It is far more likely that corruption is siphoning 10-20% of the cash aid at the most, which is $3-6B, not $200 billion. Europe has donated over $83B in financial assistance to Ukraine. How much aid the U.S. has sent to Ukraine, in 6 charts As far as Vietnam, LBJ totally escalated our involvement in the country way beyond anything that Kennedy had envisioned. National border integrity is nice to have, but with a couple thousand miles of border to the south and more than that to the north, the U.S. is not going to be able to keep everyone out. We can't afford walls high enough or trenches deep enough to keep everyone out without going bankrupt. Fortunately, most of the immigrants are beneficial to the U.S. economy. Our fruits and vegetables would suddenly become much more expensive if we did not allow immigrants to pick them for us. Russia is a far bigger threat to the future of the U.S. and our trading partners than our borders are (not just a threat from direct attack; we sell a lot of weapons to "good" countries BECAUSE Russia sells a lot of weapons to "bad" countries). Try to remember that of the 19 hijackers involved in 9-11, not one of them would have been kept out of the U.S. by a taller wall or a deeper trench at the borders. What the hell are you worried about?
If the dunce cap fits.... Your post is so littered with misstatements and inaccuracies it would take a team of fact checkers a week to fix it.
Russian propagandists celebrate the stupidity of America's traitors in Congress. Heroically doing the bidding of their master, Vladamir Putin, while fighting the best interests of the United States. Russia Celebrates Republicans Blocking Aid to Ukraine With a Missile Barrage
111 Billion--all but 3% of military procurement already spent, as of November. WATCH: White House says U.S. is running out of money for Ukraine ...plus 106 Billion China Jo requesting actually comes to more than 200 Billion. What's the hang up? Funds requested for our border security. Ie--exactly what I wrote. As for VN, LBJ only escalated. We were already there. And surely you don't suggest we would have won, had we not escalated?
As far as Vietnam goes, we shouldn't have been there in the first place. Their democratically elected leader was highly corrupt, and a bit of a junior Hitler when it came to persecuting Buddhists. The opposition was led by a communist that happened to be a big fan of the United States. We had a better chance of converting the communist to democracy than making an respectable leader out of little Hitler. Sometimes you don't need to win the fight; you just need to wait out the other side and be ready to help them transition when their economic system falters. U.S. forces in Vietnam under Kennedy were there in an advisory capacity. When LBJ assumed office, he could have (and should have) removed the troops and just walked away from Vietnam. Vietnam was a rice-growing nation that was no threat to the U.S. Communism was not a contagious disease, but LBJ acted as though it was. Kennedy and LBJ both refused to listen to intelligence from the CIA that clearly described what was going on in Vietnam, as well as gave a clear (and accurate) prediction of what would happen. Who the hell is China Jo? So spend the $106 billion. If you want to crap your pants about cash aid to Ukraine, then limit it to military aid. Failure to spend this money WILL result in TRILLIONS of additional dollars being spent on the U.S. military in the next decade if Russia is allowed to win this war. That is not speculation--it is a fact, based on the last time that Russia's economy fell apart (check upthread a few pages for exact numbers). We reduced military spending in the 1990's to the tune of several trillion dollars, partially leading to great economic prosperity (and balanced budgets) in the U.S. Worldwide, the earth would be a more peaceful place without Russia invading countries, stirring up trouble and selling weapons to anyone and everyone. Why would that (peace on earth and balanced U.S. budgets) bother you so much?
The White House agrees with me: the cost of not supporting Ukraine in the war will be very high. What is surprising to me is that ignorant people who want to stop supporting Ukraine don't realize that responding to Russian propaganda (telling them to stop supporting Ukraine) makes them simple-minded fools. Russia presses their buttons, and they respond. Put out propaganda that says that Ukraine is highly corrupt, and therefore almost all of the $80 billion that has been sent to Ukraine has been spent on luxury yachts for politicians and power brokers. Get Fox News to jump on it, and the simple-minded respond as simple-minded people do: "Stop funding now!" White House: Costs of not supporting Ukraine too high to pay
Lol! So, we were wrong to intervene in viet nam to slow the spread of communism when it was a spreading like wildfire.... but we need to piss away 100's of billions today, to prevent Russia from recapturing some of its own former territory, when it poses very little threat of "spreading". Meanwhile China's tentacles continue to manipulate our leadership into commitng national suicide on our behalf. Part of which includes pumping fentanyl through our southern border like NATO supplying arms to Ukraine... TBL, the point you can't refute, because it's the straight truth--the funding didn't pass democrat controlled senate, bc the Dems refuse to agree to OUR border security, while demanding another >100 Billion for Ukraine. For some inexplicable reason, to the dems.... Ukraine > US. Well....inexplicable without understanding the nexus provided by....'China Jo'.
Lol! You're carrying China Jo's (=the WH) water. It's not 'agreeing with you'--it's agreeing with itself.
The point that you can't refute, because it's the straight truth, is that the U.S. does not have enough money to completely secure the southern border against determined immigrants. Trump was an idiot for thinking he could put up a 2000-mile wall, and the Mexicans couldn't climb over it or tunnel under it. (There is an invention called a "ladder" that allows people to climb to great heights and climb over things that are too tall to step over.) He was a bigger fool for claiming that Mexico would pay for it. That was up there with his "maybe inject people with bleach" comment for treating Covid for stupidity. The U.S. has a lot of economic leverage with China. We are their biggest and wealthiest customer, by far. We can easily use some of that leverage to get them to stop shipping drugs to the U.S. Spending tens of billions of dollars to try to secure a 2,000-mile border is not the answer. We don't have the money to do it correctly--it would cost trillions, and it would have negative environmental impacts, and it would cause double-digit inflation. The idea that China is manipulating Biden into "national suicide" is absurd. Are you afraid that you might be forced at gunpoint to try fentanyl? Are there Chinese drug dealers on your street corner? Fentanyl is a significant problem, but compared to global security, it really is trivial. You are re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, because you don't know any better. Fox News seems to have you wound up over trivial issues to distract you from what's important. Fox News responds to Russian propaganda, and you respond to Fox News--is that it? Defeating Russia is a global security concern. Russia picked Ukraine to invade because Ukraine has $12 trillion in mineral wealth, and makes a large percentage of the world's food, which Putin can weaponize to get votes at the U.N., or gain access to African countries' mineral wealth. You are no different from the millions of uneducated people in the U.S. that refused to see the obvious at the outbreak of WWII--that the U.S. would have to be involved at some point to prevent Hitler and Tojo from taking over Europe, the middle east, and Asia. The sooner we get involved in solving the problem, the easier (and less expensive) it is to solve it. At least the unwashed masses in 1939 had the excuse that the U.S. was still going through the Great Depression--modern Americans have no such excuse. Turning our back on Ukraine will just convince Russia that the cowards of America will give a green light to any invasion they have in mind. We will not "pay any price, fight any foe, etc." The U.S. will justifiably be considered penny-pinching cowards, hoarding their billions. (We'll wind up spending ten--or a hundred--times as much at some point in the future to solve the problem of Russian aggression, BTW.) If you're o.k. with that . . .
You left out niggling details like engineering the pro-US coup of 2014, radicalizing Ukrainians against Russia, training and equipping it’s troops, ongoing intelligence and $100 billion for weapons and financial aid.
Former weapons sales rep Lloyd Austin threatens war on our sons and daughters if we don’t cough up more billions for Ukraine … Establishment Alarmism in Overdrive as Raytheon Lloyd Threatens Congress with War
