A Loud GOP Minority Pledges to Make Trouble on Ukraine Military Aid

It was rusting away even with Trump was in office. Even Governor Abbott has torn down sections of the wall in order to build his wall on state-owned property.

 

By bookkeeping I met money does not exist in a physical form. It’s not even paper. All it amounts to is a bookkeeping entry. Most of the money Federal Reserve creates is not printed. It’s just an accounting entry.

 

Bookkeeping does not create money at all. It merely accounts for how it comes in and goes out. That's it. Creating money is through the process of the money multiplier through the deposits at banks. That is different than actual physical cash, or the liquid currency ratio.

 

You mean fractional reserve banking?

 

Weird. We send $100's of Billions to Ukraine, and nation as corrupt as Russia, and some Ukrainians are getting very rich.

“Ukrainian officials have been using the war with Russia as a smokescreen by which to enrich themselves by “extorting, plundering and weakening commercial rivals” to create a new political elite, reports POLITICO.”



“When the country and people need unity the most, some of the very powerful are using the cloud of war to rape businesses.”

“No previous administration has accumulated so much power — basically unlimited power — and because of the war, it is untouchable in the eyes of the international community and the media.”

'St. Volodymyr himself, has his own whiff of U.S. taxpayer funded grift swirling around him…'

'The Ukraine government, headed by Volodymyr Zelensky, has been using American taxpayers’ funds to pay dearly for the vitally needed diesel fuel that is keeping the Ukrainian army on the move in its war with Russia.'

'Zelensky has been buying the fuel from Russia, the country with which it, and Washington, are at war, and the Ukrainian president and many in his entourage have been skimming untold millions from the American dollars earmarked for diesel fuel payments. One estimate by analysts from the Central Intelligence Agency put the embezzled funds at $400 million last year, at least; another expert compared the level of corruption in Kiev as approaching that of the Afghan war, “although there will be no professional audit reports emerging from the Ukraine.”'

'“Zelensky’s been buying discount diesel from the Russians,” one knowledgeable American intelligence official told me. “And who’s paying for the gas and oil? We are. Putin and his oligarchs are making millions” on it.'

A war between two corrupt oligarchies, both of which have bribed the Bidens.

 

They need lots of both.

 

Its not conspiracy when Republicans give voice to it.

 

I'm sure the Ghost of Kiev would love to have an F-16 to fly.

 

Have they? Who in the House or Senate has "give voice to it?"

 

So, they don't want Russia to win, but they'll help them win anyway.

The pseudo-conservative mind is a mysterious place.

 

"they'll help them win anyway?"

What are you talking about?

 

I don't see a clear longer term direction from those who oppose helping Ukraine defend itself.

Do they have ANY limits concerning Russian expansionism in Eastern Europe?

 

They are more than ok with Russia winning the war and expanding. And why would Russia stop with East Europe? They are already in Syria, and will probably expand their influence in Latin America too. That being the case, they are guaranteed to support any US candidate who is opposed US helping Ukraine, and as the OP points out their propaganda has been effective among most Republicans

 

It's just plain unbelievable what Republicans will follow without asking ANY of the pertinent questions concerning international relations.

 

It seems they will support whatever they are told to support. 15 years ago this would have been unheard of (NATO was helping us in Afghanistan), and the new authoritarian attitude is totally inconsistent with conservatism or libertarianism they once embraced. The party is unrecognizable.

 

That is a totally accurate assessment.

Their decisions are clearly oriented to whatever can gain partisan influence at the moment - with no connection to any philosophy of foreign policy or plan for the USA.

 

Just Eastern Europe? If Russia invaded Kazakhstan, I would oppose it, but I wouldn't have any interest in rallying the world to their defense or sending hundreds of billions of dollars to them.

I'm not in favor of Russia invading Ukraine, but I think it's invasion has shown that Russia is just not capable of the type of expansionism that I've seen expressed here on PF, and more embarrassingly, on actual news shows and news articles in allegedly serious newspapers and news magazines. Russia just doesn't have the ability to pour into Europe invading all the way. Certainly the NATO countries don't have reason to be worried; they're part of the most powerful military alliance the world has ever seen. Russia can't take on NATO unless they decide to say, F it, and just go nuclear.

A little more than a decade ago Obama mocked Romney about his 1980's foreign policy. Now the same people who who laughed at stupid ole Mitt are back to a 1950's foreign policy regarding a Russia that is far less capable than the old Soviet Union.

I don't get it.

 

Sitting on your ass doesn't mean that you oppose ANYTHING.

Opposing means you stand up and do something.

Plus, what we've seen in Ukraine's resistance has been seriously impressive.

But, without the west having STOOD UP in support, there is no chance Ukraine would have lasted this long. So, you need to incorporate that in your logic.

If you want to talk about some Romney policy, then state that policy.

 

Your idea of "Opposing means you stand up and do something" might be a personal choice of yours, but in terms of foreign policy, it's ridiculous. The world is full of injustices, outrages, atrocities, and the simple fact is that even the United States cannot do much about them. We're not really going to change the path of this war, we're prolonging it, but the idea that Ukraine is going to push the Russians out of Ukraine is idiocy.

It's amazing how the neo con bug has so infected the Democratic Party.

 

I mean you can stand up and do something about US foreign policy.

I certainly did NOT mean that we can necessarily change the world with military force.

Reported analysis indicates Russia has aims beyond Ukraine. So, the question is NOT just Ukraine. The issue has more to do with our strategy regarding placing effort in curbing Russian military expansionism (which is illegal as per the UN documents Russian signed) as well as other issues.

Remember that neoconism came from the Republican party frustrations with using nonmilitary influence rather than direct military intervention.

Anyway, it's crystal clear that these radical Republicans who claim they are opposing the support of Ukraine have not promoted any clear foreign policy direction even as House Republicans demand large military spending increases even as we hit the debt ceiling.

 

This is a conflict with the US wanting to take over Ukraine, on the border of the Russian Federation, for what reason I really don't know.
That progressed with the US run coup in Feb 2014 run by Victoria Nuland and the CIA, with the aid of some snipers,

and progressed with Donald Trump refusing to send in weapons, but Joe Biden and Congress in 2021 sending in lots of weapons,
which reached Poland and then Kyiv and then the front line, and on Feb 16th 2022 bombardment of Donetsk increased and
V. Putin reiterated that he would protect Donetsk and that NATO would not take Ukraine without his opposition.

 

All we had to do was not put the American weapons in and based on how things have gone
over the previous 3 decades, there would not be a war in Ukraine right now.

 

No, it is TOTAL nonsense to suggest that the US wants to take over Ukraine.

There is NOTHING the US has done that would support that notion.

Plus, this sounds like you think NATO takes over nations. But, that is also false. Every NATO nation is an independent government with its own foreign policies, trade policies, militaries, etc.

 

That direction would clearly lead to Ukraine being integrated as a piece of Russia under Putin's rule.

Russia's attempt at conquering Ukraine is not founded in Russian national defense against NATO (or whomever).

 

I don't agree with that, but even if it's true the idea that it's better to do something stupid rather than nothing at all just has not been born out by foreign policy. There are a lot fewer foreign policy fiascos from inaction than from active forward facing stupidity.

But if you don't think we can change the world with military force than I don't understand what you think you are doing in prolonging the war in Ukraine. Knowing that our government's action is going to increase the body count should be a consideration (even if it's not the only one) in funding a war that is still going to end with more of a victory for Russia than Ukraine, just with a few hundred thousand more casualties than if we had never interfered.