|
Sarcastr0 posted:How is this different than the America First philosophy of the 1930s that ended up being...not great? That's because it IS the America First philosophy of the 1930's. :edit: Not to mention the "We shouldn't spend money on X, Y and Z until we fix problems A, B and C" isn't a call to actually fix problems A, B and C. Instead its a call to their true goal, cut spending.
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 16:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 18:13 |
|
|
selec posted:Yeah I literally live in this shithole country that cannot get it together to do the basics for our citizens. You are loving right America first, as in “make sure your own home isn’t on fire before deciding to become the world’s fire chief” You are proudly echoing the slogan made famous by the American Nazi Party and Donald Trump's 2016 presidential run and you accuse me of jingoism? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 16:46
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Why are schools or hospitals here less deserving of that money They won't get that money. If they were going to get that money, it would've happened already. That's not really a good point to argue. And again as you already pointed out, that's a POLITICAL problem, not a geopolitical one. We could easily get money to schools and hospitals, that wouldn't change the amount of money sent to Ukraine. Money printer can readily go brrr as much as we need.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 16:47
|
|
|
Nucleic Acids posted:No, this is our chickens coming home to roost considering how we kept pushing NATO eastward after the end of the Cold War and basically raped Russia in the 90s. Maybe you could oblige and -finally- provide proper examples of how the NATO expansion is “threatening” to Russia? Lib and let die posted:My "Not an invasion force" badge is raising a lot of questions already answered by my "not an invasion force" badge You too, for that matter. Y’all also keep skipping the point that Eastern European countries actively wanted to join NATO, exactly because of past Russian occupation. Newsflash: not everything involving the US happens because of coercion. I’m also not seeing how Eastern European countries had an obligation to give a single flying gently caress about how Russia felt about them joining NATO.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 16:48
|
|
|
selec posted:Is the proposition here that there is an American political tradition that favors both increased military AND social spending? That’s a notion so absurd it’s not worth addressing. This would be a prominent example of someone in that tradition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_M._Jackson
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 16:48
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:You are proudly echoing the slogan made famous by the American Nazi Party and Donald Trump's 2016 presidential run and you accuse me of jingoism? this doesn’t work on us anymore dude. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 16:49
|
|
|
morothar posted:Maybe you could oblige and -finally- provide proper examples of how the NATO expansion is “threatening” to Russia? Especially when Russia was OPENLY slinging around that none of these countries deserved to be independent.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 16:49
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:You are proudly echoing the slogan made famous by the American Nazi Party and Donald Trump's 2016 presidential run and you accuse me of jingoism? He and others just don’t think we should be allowed to intervene wherever we wish while the country collapses at home.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 16:49
|
|
|
Nucleic Acids posted:He and others just don’t think we should be allowed to intervene wherever we wish while the country collapses at home. Russia, famously a country not collapsing at home yet apparently capable of invading sovereign neighbors, but we should totally let that fly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 16:51
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Russia, famously a country not collapsing at home yet apparently capable of invading sovereign neighbors, but we should totally let that fly. This “let” is where you got me confused, who made us king?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 16:52
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Russia, famously a country not collapsing at home yet apparently capable of invading sovereign neighbors, but we should totally let that fly. I mean, why is it our business? Why does the United States have the sole right to intervene in every nation and every conflict around the world?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 16:52
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:So do you think we should go to war with the whole world Look, they weren't going to spend that money on the poors no matter what, so may as well piss it away in
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 16:53
|
|
|
Nucleic Acids posted:I mean, why is it our business? Why does the United States have the sole right to intervene in every nation and every conflict around the world? We were asked to help by the Ukrainian government...
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 16:54
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:They won't get that money. If they were going to get that money, it would've happened already. That's not really a good point to argue. And again as you already pointed out, that's a POLITICAL problem, not a geopolitical one. We could easily get money to schools and hospitals, that wouldn't change the amount of money sent to Ukraine. This argument doesn't make a lot of sense, you're just using one part of a hosed up system to defend another. Ok so because our government flatly refuses to spend money on anything except endless wars, then somehow the money spent on endless wars isn't taken from schools? It's the same people doing both things! It's the same people citing the deficit to deny schools. You could defend the Trump tax cuts the same way I suppose. Hey they weren't going to spend that $2T on anything else anyway so what's the problem with spending it on that. We have a money printer right VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 16:56 on Jan 26, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 16:54
|
|
|
selec posted:This “let” is where you got me confused, who made us king? Ukraine asked for help. We also said, under the Budapest Memorandum, that we would provide help to protect Ukraine's sovereignty. Russia chose to help enable and even directly fund incursions into Ukraine. Not helping Ukraine would not suddenly solve any of the issues you guys are raising, because as Vitalsigns pointed out: Its the lack of political will to do anything about it. VitalSigns posted:This argument doesn't make a lot of sense, you're just using one part of a hosed up system to defend another. Again: How do you solve that political problem? Are you still pretending that money spent on Ukraine is somehow finite resource that we couldn't also spend at home? Because you know that's not true. The problem is dems unable to pass legislation or even take it seriously, likely on purpose. That would not be solved by not helping Ukraine when asked
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 16:54
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Ukraine asked for help. We also said, under the Budapest Memorandum, that we would provide help to protect Ukraine's sovereignty. Russia chose to help enable and even directly fund incursions into Ukraine. US politicians, famously known for keeping their promises,
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 16:55
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:We were asked to help by the Ukrainian government... “Sorry bud” is an acceptable answer. “Sorry bud, I gotta lot in my plate right now and my infant mortality rate is higher than Cuba” is an even better one
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 16:55
|
|
|
selec posted:This “let” is where you got me confused, who made us king? I would say Zelenskyy? https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1477766426945536001
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 16:56
|
|
|
Lib and let die posted:US politicians, famously known for keeping their promises, So we prove them right and not keep that one either. Gotcha. selec posted:“Sorry bud” is an acceptable answer. “Sorry bud, I gotta lot in my plate right now and my infant mortality rate is higher than Cuba” is an even better one Again, I'm going to ask: Prove to me that the money spent on lethal aid to Ukraine would instead be spent on infant mortality. I'm not saying we shouldn't be spending the money on social services, welfare, and social medicine. We should. I'm saying that money wasn't going to get spent on that anyways.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 16:57
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:We were asked to help by the Ukrainian government... We also could have done something other than do everything possible to make sure a war happens at every opportunity.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 16:57
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:So we prove them right and not keep that one either. Gotcha. So what does it say about President Joe Biden when he can't keep campaign promises like minimum 10k student debt cancellation, but can keep a promise to go to war (which by extension enriches the portfolios of those at the heads of the MIC)? What would a reasonable American who, by and large, doesn't get that money is imaginary and believes it to be a finite resource to be allocated between priorates, draw as a conclusion from this behavior?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 16:58
|
|
|
Nucleic Acids posted:We also could have done something other than do everything possible to make sure a war happens at every opportunity. Right because we're the one stationing units on the border of Ukraine and making unrealistic demands. My bad. Lib and let die posted:So what does it say about President Joe Biden when he can't keep campaign promises like minimum 10k student debt cancellation, but can keep a promise to go to war (which by extension enriches the portfolios of those at the heads of the MIC)? That President Biden loving sucks. Shocking I know.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 16:59
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:So we prove them right and not keep that one either. Gotcha. Again: Lib and let die posted:I might ask, by your own standards: please quote the posts directly equating the money earmarked for war as being responsible for lack of socialized medicine in the US today.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 17:00
|
|
|
Nucleic Acids posted:I mean, why is it our business? Why does the United States have the sole right to intervene in every nation and every conflict around the world? Whether you agree with it or not, the calculus is: 1) Ukraine asked and we have a memorandum of understanding with them that their sovereignty would be protected. 2) By using diplomacy, economic sanctions, and boosting Ukrainian defense to make an invasion as unappealing a possible, that they can spend ~$140 million to save tens of thousands of lives and prevent an extended conflict and that is a good deal. 3) The other 29 members of NATO all approved assistance because Russian expansion into their borders is a threat to them and they want to prevent both an extended conflict and any threats to their border.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 17:00
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:
Again you could defend Trump the same way. Since he didn't want to spend money on healthcare what was wrong with his tax cuts, that money wasn't going to anything else brrrrrrr
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 17:00
|
|
|
Nucleic Acids posted:We also could have done something other than do everything possible to make sure a war happens at every opportunity. Like letting Ukraine join NATO, which would have been basically free? Yeah. Well, poo poo. We didn’t do that. If it isn’t the consequences of our actions…
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 17:01
|
|
|
Finally, this time, this will be the just and noble world police action the US has needed. Sure, every previous time this argument was used to justify war it ended up being a crock and really just a way to make money. But this time we are doing this for the right reasons.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 17:02
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Right because we're the one stationing units on the border of Ukraine and making unrealistic demands. My bad. Well, we basically are trying to put troops up on Russia’s border considering our policies with NATO and Eastern Europe, to say nothing of how many other times we’ve intervened in other nation’s affairs since the ostensible reason for said alliance ceased to exist 30 years ago.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 17:02
|
|
|
morothar posted:Like letting Ukraine join NATO, which would have been basically free? Yeah. Well, poo poo. We didn’t do that. If it isn’t the consequences of our actions… We are more responsible for Vladimir Putin being in office right now than any other force on earth when accounting for our actions in and around Russia after the fall of the USSR.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 17:03
|
|
|
Lib and let die posted:Again: No, you need to demonstrate that $500 million not being used on these programs, which could easily be funded, somehow prevented these programs for being enacted. I fully suspect you cannot and that those programs were instead destroyed by neoliberal and conservative pushes to target social safety nets. The lack of funding is not tied to the immediate ongoing crisis in Ukraine. That's the claim they pushed. And saying that "Well we cannot spend the money because of social issues at home" wouldn't get the bills passed to both funds AND FIX those programs. Because they cannot even pass BBB as lovely as it is. Ironically the lethal aid to Ukraine is more honest about our priorities than pretending that we'd solve our social funding issues at home by not sending it. Nucleic Acids posted:We are more responsible for Vladimir Putin being in office right now than any other force on earth when accounting for our actions in and around Russia after the fall of the USSR. United States: The source of all the worlds ills. Sorry Ukraine, can't help you in the face of an immanent invasion, since we caused that guy. CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 17:06 on Jan 26, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 17:04
|
|
|
Nucleic Acids posted:We are more responsible for Vladimir Putin being in office right now than any other force on earth when accounting for our actions in and around Russia after the fall of the USSR. And? Or is this another attempt at whataboutism.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 17:05
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:No, you need to demonstrate that $500 million not being used on these programs, which could easily be funded, somehow prevented these programs for being enacted. I fully suspect you cannot and that those programs were instead destroyed by neoliberal and conservative pushes to target social safety nets. No, I don't. You're making up the argument that we'd have socialized healthcare if it weren't for military spending. But you've also got the star and buttons so 
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 17:05
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:AHIP and Americans for Tax Reform don't lobby for more military spending. And AHIP is totally okay with more social spending as long as it doesn't result in shutting them out of the new spending revenue.  Of course America's Health Insurance Plans' members are totally ok with more "social spending"; it means welfare for them in the form of federal subsidies toward unlimited pricing, thus enhancing their profits & shareholders' dividends, instead of direct care or insurance that's provided by the government.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 17:05
|
|
|
Nucleic Acids posted:It really isn’t, considering how conditions in those countries are the direct result of us dicking around south of the Rio Grande for at least 120 years. Nucleic Acids posted:We are more responsible for Vladimir Putin being in office right now than any other force on earth when accounting for our actions in and around Russia after the fall of the USSR.  Shouldn't your logic then follow if we're responsible for Putin being in office, we should be responsible for negative outcomes that stem from it? Instead of your prior claim ofNucleic Acids posted:Ukraine’s need are not ours, why should be wasting money on them? Kalit fucked around with this message at 17:08 on Jan 26, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 17:06
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:No, you need to demonstrate that $500 million not being used on these programs, which could easily be funded, somehow prevented these programs for being enacted. I fully suspect you cannot and that those programs were instead destroyed by neoliberal and conservative pushes to target social safety nets. Manchin is citing the deficit as a reason not to pass social spending right now, you cannot simply handwave away all the war spending and tax cuts for the rich that led to the deficit. Just because you personally believe in MMT doesn't mean that's how these decisions are being made.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 17:07
|
|
|
Nucleic Acids posted:Well, we basically are trying to put troops up on Russia’s border considering our policies with NATO and Eastern Europe, to say nothing of how many other times we’ve intervened in other nation’s affairs since the ostensible reason for said alliance ceased to exist 30 years ago. Russia literally invaded and annexed 15% of Ukraine a few years ago. The U.S. has 1,600 troops within 150 miles of a Russian border, NATO has 4,000 troops total in all of Eastern Europe, and Russia has moved 115,000 troops to the Ukrainian border in the past month and is openly saying that they need to annex the rest of it. Which do you think is more likely to be launching an invasion in the next month? Of all the takes, it seems bizarre to go with "Well, anybody could be invading!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 17:07
|
|
|
morothar posted:And? Or is this another attempt at whataboutism. It’s not, because that’s not what whataboutism is, it’s just recognizing that this situation is our fault and we are hell bent on making it worse while doing nothing at home.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 17:07
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:
Yeah, that was literally the point. Thank you for confirming that you understood?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 17:08
|
|
|
Kalit posted:
Considering our record in intervening in foreign conflicts, especially ones that result from our actions, I do not believe claims of righteousness in this one justify more war on our part.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 17:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 18:13 |
|
|
Lib and let die posted:But you've also got the star and buttons so Have I probed or threaten to probe you a single point in this discussion? gently caress off with this poo poo. Lib and let die posted:No, I don't. You're making up the argument that we'd have socialized healthcare if it weren't for military spending. No, that is the argument that Nucleic Acid and others are making. That the money would be better spent at home but they both fully ignore that they know it won't get spent at home, and also pretend that the largely Neoliberal Democrats and the Conservatives in power are not suddenly going to have a change of heart and stop rolling back social safety nets.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 17:08
|
|