Asking
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

$175 billion spent, zero results. What should we have expected?



Photo above - US Secretary of State Marco Rubio arrives in Saudi Arabia for Russian peace talks. He is apparently receiving tips from renowned assassin and oppressor crown prince MBS.

I can just see Elon Musk rolling his eyes now. “We spent HOW much? $175 billion!!?? And we have nothing to show for it? Pull the plug . . .”

That $175 billion of course is the total US aid sent to Ukraine so far. To save the nation from Russian invasion and atrocities. Military aid, humanitarian aid, the whole ball of wax. Russia may have spent less on it’s invasion, in terms of rubles (they used outdated legacy weapons and cheap Iranian drones) but has lost hundreds of thousands of men – soldiers, forced conscripts, prisoners on parole, malnourished North Korean dwarves . . .

The progressive press is apoplectic: “How can we abandon Ukraine at a time like this?” How, indeed?
There were only a couple of ways this war could have ended:

- Russia wins in the first 2 weeks, like the Pentagon advised Biden. To everyone's surprise, Ukranian troops and generals proved smarter and more motivated than Putin’s invaders.

- NATO enters the conflict. Either by enforcing a no-fly zone, or activating ground troops. Europe vetoed this because Putin kept going on TV and promising to nuke various nation's capitols. The Biden administration had no maneuvering room and refused to call Putin’s bluff on its own.

- A negotiated settlement, which ratifies the real estate captured at that point in time, and allows Putin to save face, while giving him time to re-arm. This is where we are today.

It’s okay to blame Trump for tossing Hegseth and Rubio into the furnace before they even unpacked. But please recognize that negotiations were Biden's 2025 plan all along. Keep Ukraine out of the news until after re-election, then begin negotiations to decide which flag stays where. If you’re not going to use NATO, or send in US troops unilaterally, it’s your only option. You can't keep spending hundreds of billions forever. The US public is war weary. And unlike war weary Russians, we get to vote about things we don't like.

So yes, Putin wins. If you have another solution, please post it below. In the meantime, let’s move along, shall we?

I dismiss the bluster of French President Macron, who threatened to send French troops to Kiev. This is the guy who was flummoxed by a few dozen striking railroad workers.

Germany is a joke. They're still buying Russian oil and natural gas, keeping Putin’s murderous dream alive. And at the same time wringing their hands and bemoaning the atrocities.

England isn’t going to do anything unless the US does. They only have 10% of US troop strength and only spend 10% as much on their military. And England, Germany and France are all behind on their NATO dues. Besides the USA, only Greece and Poland are up to date. Poland shares a border with Ukraine, and is watching this thing play out nervously.

Defense Secretary Hegseth is a disaster so far. Rubio seems a bit more polished and astute. I don’t buy the notion that Russian negotiators are “experts” who will eat him for lunch. However, I certainly DO buy the notion that Russians are ruthless thugs who don’t care how many people die. That is their secret negotiating power. "Look !!! We just crashed a drone into the Chernobyl containment dome! Bwaaah . . . you're all gonna die!"

I find it both hilarious and deplorable that PBS, CNN and other mainstream media are now screeching in anguish over negotiations. They would have been cheering if this was Biden. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds. And those pundit probably couldn’t even figure out the 3 ways this war could end, so they’re morons too.

I’m just sayin’ . . .

How Much U.S. Aid Is Going to Ukraine? | Council on Foreign Relations

US, Russia wrap first Ukraine talks in Saudi Arabia. Europe sidelined
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
exchrist · 31-35
@SusanInFlorida yes i agree; whats next? it could escalate. There is a reason not to negotiate with terrorists. It makes the terrorist feel justified and empowered; inspiring others to do the same and the terrorist to do it again. Also given that italy is a member of nato ukraine is mediteranean adjacent and the precedent seems to be thats enough. Therefore if ukraine cannot be a member italy has to go too. And several others.
Assuming trump is trying to give favortism to russia. In its war with ukraine (a democracy) something does not add up. And trump is increasingly unpopular.
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@exchrist i have consistently (since before Russia's invasion of Ukraine) suggested we are misusing NATO. Some of my complaints

1 - there are too many NATO members. Drop the security risks like Turkey, and those without credible air forces. Planes and missiles win modern wars, not foot soldiers and tanks.

2 - NATO's premise has been proved wrong. We were never willing to deploy troops to stop "thousands of tanks and infantrymen" marching west from Moscow.

3 - NATO needs to create strict "no cheating" rules. You have to keep your armed forces at an agreed on level. You can't buy energy or grain from a nation which is attacking a NATO adjacent democracy..

4 - Strict no travel rules on nations like Russia which launch wars. No landing rights for aeroflot. no travel visas for the top echelon of civilian and military leaders.