Foreign aid to ukraine

[jfish26]

You DO want to (keep) sending anything (overwhelmingly just weapons) to Ukraine?

We’ve already sent hundreds of bajillions to Ukraine. And what do we have to show for it? Russia controls like a fifth of Ukraine, the counter-offensive gained hardly anything, and we American taxpayers are expected to just keep sending bajillions more. What we have to show for it, big picture restoration of our European relationships (and signaling to China) aside, is that Russia is so desperate and low on supplies that they are using erector-set, paper mache North Korean missiles. They’re using meat necklace conscripts. They’re on the ropes, man.

I’ve tried to make the humanity-based argument, and also the WMDs-in-Iraq based one too, to no avail. This is because there is not a good “humanity-based” argument AGAINST defending one ally directly, and many more allies indirectly, from a unilateral, unprovoked war of aggression by Putin. No amount of magical blame-shifting toward Ukraine (or us) changes this.

So let’s try the free market capitalist-based argument, maybe that of all things will resonate:

At what point do you admit that investing more and more money at an investment that is just not producing the desired returns, is maybe just a bad investment? If you want to look at it through this lens, you should probably think through where the money is actually GOING. In large part, it is going to DOMESTIC contractors, employing American workers to produce replenishments of UNITED STATES stocks and stores. You may - and clearly do - disagree that this is something that is desirable. But I am responding here to your suggestion (here and elsewhere) that we’re basically handing burlap sacks of cash to Ukrainian nazis. We are not. No amount of magical thinking makes that true.

You’re flailing. Starting from the end (we should bail on Ukraine) and working backwards (through inconsistent and incompatible argument paths).

See above.

[ousdahl]

sigh.

[Shirley]

This is a long post, but if you follow the link, it goes on even further explaining why the propaganda being spread about how much our support for Ukraine is costing Americans, is nearly total BS.

Opinion Ukraine aid’s best-kept secret: Most of the money stays in the U.S.A.

That’s right: Funds that lawmakers approve to arm Ukraine are not going directly to Ukraine but are being used stateside to build new weapons or to replace weapons sent to Kyiv from U.S. stockpiles. Of the $68 billion in military and related assistance Congress has approved since Russia invaded Ukraine, almost 90 percent is going to Americans, one analysis found.

But you wouldn’t know that from the actions of some U.S. lawmakers. When Ohio Sen. J.D. Vance ® joined a United Auto Workers picket line in October at the Jeep assembly plant in Toledo, he said he wanted to “show some support for the UAW workers” in his state. Yet he has not shown the same solidarity with the UAW workers in Lima, Ohio, who are churning out Abrams tanks and Stryker combat vehicles for Ukraine thanks to the military aid that Congress has approved. Vance opposes Ukraine aid, as does Rep. Jim Jordan (R), whose House district includes Lima.

Ohio voters might have expected their elected leaders to be pushing the (reluctant) Biden administration to give Ukraine more Lima-produced tanks and vehicles — or to require that more of them be included in the aid package for Ukraine that Congress will soon take up. Instead, Vance and Jordan are fighting to stop Ukraine from receiving any more union-made tanks and combat vehicles from America’s only tank factory.

It’s not just them. In all, 31 senators and House members whose states or districts benefit from funding for Ukraine have voted to oppose or restrict that aid. They include some of the most prominent anti-Ukraine voices in Congress, such as Republican Sens. Josh Hawley (Mo.), Tommy Tuberville (Ala.) and Mike Braun (Ind.), as well as Republican Reps. Matt Gaetz (Fla.), Bill Posey (Fla.), Anna Paulina Luna (Fla.) and Lance Gooden (Tex.).

At a time when both major parties are competing to win working-class votes and strengthen the U.S. manufacturing base, our military aid to Ukraine does exactly that — it is providing a major cash infusion into factories across the country that directly benefits American workers. It is also creating jobs and opportunities for local suppliers, shops, restaurants and other businesses that support the factories rolling out weapons.

Until now, no one had mapped out precisely where these U.S. military aid funds are going. My American Enterprise Institute colleagues Clara Keuss, Noah Burke and I have catalogued the weapons systems being produced in the United States for Ukraine — tracing the states and congressional districts where they are being made and how senators and House members voted on the funding. We analyzed contracts and press releases and spoke to defense industry experts, diplomats and Pentagon officials to determine where U.S. tax dollars end up.

We have identified 117 production lines in at least 31 states and 71 cities where American workers are producing major weapons systems for Ukraine. For example, aid that Congress has already approved is going to, among many other places:

Simi Valley, Calif.;

Fullerton, Calif.;

Andover, Mass.;

Forest, Miss.;

and York, Pa.,

to build Switchblade unmanned aerial systems, radar systems and tactical vehicles.


York, Pa., and Anniston, Ala., to build Bradley infantry fighting vehicles.

Aiken, S.C.; Elgin, Okla.; Sterling Heights, Mich.; Endicott, N.Y.; York, Pa.; and Minneapolis to build howitzers.

Peoria, Ill.; Clearwater, Palm Bay and Niceville, Fla.; Camden, Ark.; Lancaster and Grand Prairie, Tex.; Rocket Center, W.Va.; and Trenton, N.J., to build HIMARS launchers.

Anniston and Huntsville, Ala., and Camden, Ark., to build parts for the Hydra-70 rocket.

Farmington, N.M.; Orlando; Tucson; and Troy, Ala., to build Javelin antitank missiles.

Many other weapons systems are being built for Ukraine in factories around our country. Nor does this list count the suppliers that provide these contractors with parts, such as plastic and computer chips, or produce smaller items for Ukraine, such as cold-weather and night-vision gear, medical supplies, spare parts and millions of rounds of small-arms ammunition. As one Ukrainian official told me, “Every single state in the U.S. contributes to this effort.”

Ukraine aid funds are going to at least 71 American cities where weapons systems and parts are being manufactured.

In other words, as happens with foreign military aid, our aid to Ukraine is not only creating American jobs but also reinvigorating our dangerously atrophied defense industrial base. Vance said in October that “the condition of the American defense industrial base is a national scandal. Repairing it is among our most urgent priorities.” Well, our aid to Ukraine is doing exactly that.

For example, the United States had not built a single new Stinger antiaircraft missile since 2005. The terrorists we were fighting in recent decades did not have jet fighters, so production faltered. Now, thanks to the Ukraine aid that Vance opposes, the Pentagon signed a $624.6 million contract last year to build Stinger missiles in Tucson, to replace about 1,400 sent to Ukraine. Without our Ukraine resupply effort, the Stinger production line likely would have remained dormant — perhaps until bombs started dropping in a conflict over Taiwan.

Or take the $600 million being used to build two weapons systems for Ukraine in St. Charles, Mo. One is the Joint Direct Attack Munition-Extended Range (JDAM ER), an air-launched GPS-guided weapon that converts dumb bombs into precision-guided glide bombs with a range of up to 45 miles (triple the range of the original weapon). The other is the Ground Launched Small Diameter Bomb (GLSDB), a weapon system newly developed for Ukraine that can be launched from High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) and can travel 93 miles, almost double the range of current ground-launched precision munition systems.

If we were not aiding Ukraine, the United States would not be producing either of these weapons. The funding Congress has provided to manufacture both systems injects many millions of dollars into Missouri’s economy and is busying production lines for these advanced capabilities. Those systems will now be available for the United States and Taiwan should a conflict erupt with China, as well as available for Israel.

Workers in West Plains, Mo., are using Ukraine aid to build the MIM-104 Phased Array Tracking Radar for the Patriot missile system that shocked the world this year by downing Russia’s supposedly “invincible” hypersonic missile. This saved Ukrainian lives and proved in real battlefield conditions that the upgraded Patriot system might help defend against hypersonic threats from other adversaries.

Most senators would take credit for these successes. Not Hawley, who is trying to cut funding for these systems being built in his state. The same goes for Rep. Jason T. Smith, who represents Missouri’s 8th Congressional District, where the Patriot radars are built, yet has voted against such aid multiple times. Missouri’s other Republican U.S. senator, Eric Schmitt, has not yet voted on Ukraine aid but has said, “I don’t support these forever wars.” Perhaps he will support defense investments that benefit Missouri workers and strengthen our military production capacity to defend against Communist China?

Among the most shocking examples of our defense industrial base’s decline is our struggle to produce a relatively simple munition: 155mm artillery shells. These shells would be in high demand in any conflict the United States fights. Ukraine is firing 6,000 to 8,000 such shells a day, and Israel is ordering them by the tens of thousands. But before Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine last year, the United States was producing fewer than 15,000 shells per month. So the Pentagon has allocated $1.5 billion to boost production by 500 percent and is on pace to reach 100,000 per month.

With our withered defense production capacity, including a lack of machine tools, reaching that rate will take two years. Even then, the U.S. output in 2025 is likely to not match that of Russia in 2024. But were it not for our aid to Ukraine, those U.S. production increases would not be happening. With money Congress approved to arm Kyiv, shells are being assembled in Scranton and Wilkes-Barre, Pa., and in a new factory in Camden, Ark., using components (including explosives, propellant, primers, fuses and shell bodies) produced in such U.S. cities and towns as Kingsport and Cordova, Tenn.; Bristol, Pa.; Middletown, Iowa; and Coachella, Calif. A factory being built in Mesquite, Tex., is expected to produce about 20,000 shells a month and employ at least 125 workers after it comes online early next year. The president of the Mesquite Chamber of Commerce told the New York Times that lawmakers who oppose Ukraine aid are “voting against your constituents. … You’re literally saying no to the people you’re representing.” Yet Gooden, who represents Mesquite, voted against the aid that is helping fund the new plant in his district.

Our aid to Ukraine is not only forcing the Pentagon to rapidly increase the United States’ ability to produce weapons; it’s also modernizing the U.S. military. As retired Army Maj. Gen. John G. Ferrari, now a colleague at the American Enterprise Institute, recently pointed out, we are giving Ukraine weapons systems that are often decades old and then replacing our stockpiles with more advanced versions. “Because of the existing budget pressures on the Army, it wouldn’t be able to afford this needed modernization of equipment on its own,” Ferrari wrote in an op-ed. “By transferring weapons and gear to Ukraine, the Army would receive more modern weapons in return.”

[...]

[ousdahl]

it's a wonder you ever opposed Vietnam.

[Shirley]

it's a wonder you ever opposed Vietnam.

Your inability to appreciate the distinctions between the US involvement in Vietnam and Ukraine is but one example of the flawed premises and vast conflations you regularly rely on as arguments that render engaging with you a waste of time.

Are you merely ignoring the differences in an attempt to make some point? Or, like not knowing that Hamas' reason for existence is to wipe Israel off the face of the earth, are you simply uninformed about the subject(s)?

[ousdahl]

I recognize differences, for sure. If you'd like to continue treating me as dumb anyway and bring any distinguishing differences to my attention, please feel free.

I think it's worth recognizing them.

But, I think there are plenty of similarities, too. Don't you?

I think it's wroth recognizing them, too.

at the end of the day, they're both wars. They're both wars on the other side of the world, where some poor country is caught as cannon fodder between imperial powers. They're both wars furnished by U.S. taxpayers. They're both wars that began as proxy wars.

And I'd say that they're both wars that began under bullshit pretenses - the same dipshits who sold us on WMDs in Iraq! - but I know we're still supposed to give the benefit of the doubt to the Ukraine rhetoric. So if it makes you feel better, you can chalk that one up as one of your differences, at least for the time being.

And, nearing the two-year anniversary of the beginning of this war - Ukraine, like Vietnam at the same point, has no end in sight. Just more hawks calling for more guns, more bombs, more war. If we don't, well, what'll stop Putin invasions from spreading like wildfire? It'll be the Domino Effect all over again!

The thing is - and again! - I'm trying for some anti-war stance here. Not anti-war just in hindsight, not anti-war for other warmongering countries but not for us, not anti-war except when it creates jobs, jobs, jobs! Just anti-war.

please consider that maybe, just maybe, the same rhetoric that has conditioned you guys to be so absolute and so relentless about war, has also conditioned you to be so rejecting of any voices trying to oppose it.

[ousdahl]

and, ooh man. I haven't touched Israel/Palestine ever since that peace-loving hippie Overlander called for a ceasefire now. But, yea, I know Hamas is a bunch of terrorists who wanna wipe Israel off the face of the earth.

Now, did you know that Israel IS wiping Gaza off the face of the earth? Like, as literally as one can say that?

They've dropped thousands of bombs, paid for by you and me, upon mostly women and children. They've destroyed thousands of civilian infrastructures - homes, hospitals, schools, houses of worship, entire communities gone forever.

They've racked up tens of thousands of casualties so far, with who knows how many more pending once the rubble is cleared. They've told fleeing Gazans to seek refuge in some "safe space," then bombed the safe space anyway. They've bombed buildings, waited for first responders to arrive, then bombed them again. They've killed men, women, children, Muslims, Christians, even other Jews, as they waved white flags and begged for mercy in Hebrew.

Even Joe Fucking Biden has said Israel is acting indiscriminately! (not that that's stopped Biden from going being congress's back to give Israel more bombs, over and again)

They've forced almost two million surviving Gazans into like a 2.5 square mile space of desolate, sandy terrain without resources. The next move is to just let them all starve to death, assuming they aren't bombed to death first...or force them into some other country under the guise of "voluntary" migration.

They've been bombing the West Bank too, where Hamas is not even in control.

They've been bombing Lebanon, bombing Syria, bombing all across the Middle East.

I bring this all up because 1. you brought it up first, 2. it continues to bother the fuck out of me, 3. holy war crimes Batman!, and 4. yea Hamas should be condemned but at some point I think we should ask if Israel's aggression is really even about Hamas any more.

[Overlander]

You should fly over to Gaza.
Grab an AK, hunker down.
Give that pesky IDF a taste of their own medicine.

[jfish26]

I recognize differences, for sure. If you'd like to continue treating me as dumb anyway and bring any distinguishing differences to my attention, please feel free.

I think it's worth recognizing them.

But, I think there are plenty of similarities, too. Don't you?

I think it's wroth recognizing them, too.

at the end of the day, they're both wars. They're both wars on the other side of the world, where some poor country is caught as cannon fodder between imperial powers. They're both wars furnished by U.S. taxpayers. They're both wars that began as proxy wars.

And I'd say that they're both wars that began under bullshit pretenses - the same dipshits who sold us on WMDs in Iraq! - but I know we're still supposed to give the benefit of the doubt to the Ukraine rhetoric. So if it makes you feel better, you can chalk that one up as one of your differences, at least for the time being.

And, nearing the two-year anniversary of the beginning of this war - Ukraine, like Vietnam at the same point, has no end in sight. Just more hawks calling for more guns, more bombs, more war. If we don't, well, what'll stop Putin invasions from spreading like wildfire? It'll be the Domino Effect all over again!

The thing is - and again! - I'm trying for some anti-war stance here. Not anti-war just in hindsight, not anti-war for other warmongering countries but not for us, not anti-war except when it creates jobs, jobs, jobs! Just anti-war.

please consider that maybe, just maybe, the same rhetoric that has conditioned you guys to be so absolute and so relentless about war, has also conditioned you to be so rejecting of any voices trying to oppose it.

I respect that you’re anti-war.

But I think you’ve found yourself in this weird spot where you’re pot-committed to arranging facts and arguments in odd and conflicting ways, because that’s the only way the picture on the page can somewhat resemble the picture on the box.

For example, to make your point, you compare Ukraine to Vietnam. In fact, you breezily (but somewhat annoyedly) invite Shirley to feel free to bring any distinguishing differences between Ukraine and Vietnam to your attention.

As with other things, by starting from a place where the two things are assumed to be inherently, fundamentally comparable - which is what you’re doing when you casually treat “any distinctions” between the two things as wrinkles that can be ironed out - you’ve built an argument on a rotten foundation.

Because, for example, I think it is more than a mere “distinction” that fourteen US citizens have died in the Russia-Ukraine war, compared with 58,220 in Vietnam.

I think you and I would agree that we would not LIKE the number of US dead to increase from the size of a basketball team missing a few walkons, to the size of a Final Four crowd.

And so I suppose I’ll ask - would you have us renege on our NATO commitments if Russia takes Ukraine, and then moves on a NATO nation? Because if you think this is a no-win quagmire now, when all it costs is some money that we’re largely paying ourselves anyway…hoo boy.

[DeletedUser]

Holy crap. He's still going?

Ousdahl: We get it. You're anti war.

Can you please stop this nonsense? You've been repeating yourself for literally several years now. Day in a day out.


You've proven you are anti war and a pacifist. We applaud you for that.

You've also proven you are very uneducated about many/most/all of the more nuanced aspects of each of the conflicts you've tried to come across as some enlightened expert on.

Just stop (cease-fire now) . For your sake. And ours.

[jhawks99]

When Illy tells you it's time to shut up....
It's like gusher telling you that you've had enough.

[ousdahl]

Because, for example, I think it is more than a mere “distinction” that fourteen US citizens have died in the Russia-Ukraine war, compared with 58,220 in Vietnam.

thanks for at least respecting my attempts at an anti-war stance.

one thing about being anti-war is, I struggle to make a distinction between "good guy" deaths versus "bad guy" deaths. I think ALL deaths are bad here, regardless of which side they're on. As such, I don't think it's appropriate to shrug off, "well at least hardly any Americans have died!", when there have been like tens of thousands of dead Ukrainian people (if not more), and prob even more dead Russian people (and that's not cracking the can of worms that is whether to humanize the Russian people).

It also seems, I dunno, disingenuous to shrug off even the good guy (Ukrainian) deaths here, while also celebrating things like, "well this creates American jobs! This weakens Russia and flexes on China!", as if the motive here might have been something ulterior; something besides the freedom and democracy of the Ukrainian people.

I think you and I would agree that we would not LIKE the number of US dead to increase from the size of a basketball team missing a few walkons, to the size of a Final Four crowd.

see above. We're already at Final Four crowd numbers, if not more. It's just that it's not US dead. That view seems so US-centric, maybe even nationalistic.

And so I suppose I’ll ask - would you have us renege on our NATO commitments if Russia takes Ukraine, and then moves on a NATO nation? Because if you think this is a no-win quagmire now, when all it costs is some money that we’re largely paying ourselves anyway…hoo boy.

I'm of the view that NATO is obsolete; a military alliance against another alliance that hasn't even existed for like 30 years now (remember that other thing you posted the other day about how the Soviet Union is no longer a threat?)

I think it's very possible Russia would have never bothered taking Ukraine if not for the US and NATO bringing their military footprint right up to Russia's doorstep, then, when Putin tried to engage us about it diplomatically, telling him to pound sand.

That's to say, yes, I think the US and NATO provoked Russia.

With Afghanistan in the rear view mirror, we needed a new endless war again. For the jobs, jobs, jobs! And think of the prices of Raytheon stock!

I could go on. But for now, let me just again thank you for at least respecting that I'm trying for anti-war here, and also thank you for making it this long without calling me a Putin parrot. (but I know, that "provoke" word might do it again)

[ousdahl]

oh, one other compare/contrast with 'Nam -

while they're both years-long conflicts with (at this point) no end in sight, I'm concerned it may be only a matter of time until US forces become (more) actively involved in Ukraine, just like it happened in Vietnam.

I mean, "only" two years into 'Nam, there wasn't much of an anti-war movement yet, right?

That's to say, perhaps it's just a matter of time until even the Shirleys begin voicing opposition to the Ukraine war too.

Let's give it a few more years and see...though I hope it's deescalated before that.

[DeletedUser]

Ceasefire NOW!

[randylahey]

oh, one other compare/contrast with 'Nam -

while they're both years-long conflicts with (at this point) no end in sight, I'm concerned it may be only a matter of time until US forces become (more) actively involved in Ukraine, just like it happened in Vietnam.

I mean, "only" two years into 'Nam, there wasn't much of an anti-war movement yet, right?

That's to say, perhaps it's just a matter of time until even the Shirleys begin voicing opposition to the Ukraine war too.

Let's give it a few more years and see...though I hope it's deescalated before that.

Vote trump 2024 then.

All these senseless foreign conflicts we are caught up in are directly tied to the biden administration and the deep state that

[ousdahl]

and the deep state that….

and the deep state THAT…..?!

Come on randy this cliffhanger is killing me!

But dude Trump is just as much an accused war criminal as Biden. He too dropped plenty of bombs all across the world.

In a just world they should both be tried, along with Bush, Cheney, Obama, Clinton, Putin, Netanyahu, Zelensky, et al.

[TDub]

this, is absolutely nothing like Vietnam. Good grief.


There's ignorant and there's stupid.

Ignorance can be changed with information and education.

You can't fix stupid.

I keep holding out hope that ignorance is the culprit here.

[jfish26]

Because, for example, I think it is more than a mere “distinction” that fourteen US citizens have died in the Russia-Ukraine war, compared with 58,220 in Vietnam.

thanks for at least respecting my attempts at an anti-war stance.

one thing about being anti-war is, I struggle to make a distinction between "good guy" deaths versus "bad guy" deaths. I think ALL deaths are bad here, regardless of which side they're on. As such, I don't think it's appropriate to shrug off, "well at least hardly any Americans have died!", when there have been like tens of thousands of dead Ukrainian people (if not more), and prob even more dead Russian people (and that's not cracking the can of worms that is whether to humanize the Russian people).

It also seems, I dunno, disingenuous to shrug off even the good guy (Ukrainian) deaths here, while also celebrating things like, "well this creates American jobs! This weakens Russia and flexes on China!", as if the motive here might have been something ulterior; something besides the freedom and democracy of the Ukrainian people.

I think you and I would agree that we would not LIKE the number of US dead to increase from the size of a basketball team missing a few walkons, to the size of a Final Four crowd.

see above. We're already at Final Four crowd numbers, if not more. It's just that it's not US dead. That view seems so US-centric, maybe even nationalistic.

And so I suppose I’ll ask - would you have us renege on our NATO commitments if Russia takes Ukraine, and then moves on a NATO nation? Because if you think this is a no-win quagmire now, when all it costs is some money that we’re largely paying ourselves anyway…hoo boy.

I'm of the view that NATO is obsolete; a military alliance against another alliance that hasn't even existed for like 30 years now (remember that other thing you posted the other day about how the Soviet Union is no longer a threat?)

I think it's very possible Russia would have never bothered taking Ukraine if not for the US and NATO bringing their military footprint right up to Russia's doorstep, then, when Putin tried to engage us about it diplomatically, telling him to pound sand.

That's to say, yes, I think the US and NATO provoked Russia.

With Afghanistan in the rear view mirror, we needed a new endless war again. For the jobs, jobs, jobs! And think of the prices of Raytheon stock!

I could go on. But for now, let me just again thank you for at least respecting that I'm trying for anti-war here, and also thank you for making it this long without calling me a Putin parrot. (but I know, that "provoke" word might do it again)

You're making all of this so much harder than it needs to be.

If "ALL deaths are bad here," then blame the guy who started a war killing hundreds of thousands.

If you are critical of motives that are "something besides the freedom and democracy of the Ukrainian people," then (1) go ahead and un-make the "free market capitalist-based argument" you made last night, and more importantly (2) blame the guy who started a war on Ukraine's freedom and democracy.

And I'm sorry, it is baseless - or, if you prefer less formality, Grade A Bullshit - to say things like:

I think it's very possible Russia would have never bothered taking Ukraine if not for the US and NATO bringing their military footprint right up to Russia's doorstep, then, when Putin tried to engage us about it diplomatically, telling him to pound sand.

That's to say, yes, I think the US and NATO provoked Russia.

If you want to stop being accused of being a Putin parrot, you may at any time simply stop parroting Putin's talking points.

This is where - again - you leave naive-but-well-intentioned "anti-war" behind, and steam headlong into a stance that is, much MORE so than anyone else's here, very much pro-war.

And frankly, all of this is so clear-cut and so self-evident that I don't think it's even fair anymore to graciously say your turn here is "unwitting" (even if you don't WANT to have taken the turn).

I would again suggest you take a fresh look at Putin's speech at the outset of this war: https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/n ... raine-war/

It is simply true that you have more or less adopted each of the major pillars of his case for making war on Ukraine.

To wit:

“Russia is seeking peace” [in your last post, you talk about "when Putin tried to engage us about it diplomatically, [we told] him to pound sand"]
“Russia has a moral obligation to do something about security in the region” [in many posts, you accept Russia as being at least partly justified in making war on Ukraine]
“Ukraine is aggressive” (including attempts to associate Ukraine with terrorism, Nazis, and weapons of mass destruction) [you have supported Russia's association of Ukraine with Nazis and defense contracting firms]
“The West is creating tensions in the region” [see, among many other things, your quoted post]
“Ukraine is a puppet of the West” [see, among many other things, your quoted post]

You might not like it. I wouldn't, either. But if you cannot see that you are pretty much falling in line behind Putin here, you are simply choosing not to see it.

[jfish26]

this, is absolutely nothing like Vietnam. Good grief.


There's ignorant and there's stupid.

Ignorance can be changed with information and education.

You can't fix stupid.

I keep holding out hope that ignorance is the culprit here.

What WOULD be like Vietnam, is Russia attacking Poland, and us fulfilling our treaty obligations.

[TDub]

this, is absolutely nothing like Vietnam. Good grief.


There's ignorant and there's stupid.

Ignorance can be changed with information and education.

You can't fix stupid.

I keep holding out hope that ignorance is the culprit here.

What WOULD be like Vietnam, is Russia attacking Poland, and us fulfilling our treaty obligations.

that would be closer...but even then, not as egregious.