this post was submitted on 14 Jul 2023
1303 points (97.0% liked)

politics

23206 readers
3295 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 12 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Go look at where and how that money is being spent. I think you will find that the vast majority of it isn't leaving America. American businesses who already do business with the American government will do a little bit more, sending consumables and other assets to Ukraine. From an economic standpoint this is little different than a 10% increase in the American military budget, with the bonus of no expectation that it will be the new baseline going forward.

[–] MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works -3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

From an economic standpoint this is little different than a 10% increase in the American military budget

Is that supposed to be a selling point?

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

No, just pointing out that even though the military support is going to Ukraine, the economic benefits are still primarily American, which belies the excuse for why they don't want to support Ukraine.

[–] MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works -3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

If you consider further bloating military spending to be a benefit, sure

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Reread my original comment. And this is probably the last thing you want to cut. Leaving allies twisting in the wind when you pushed for nuclear deproliferation with the assurance you would help protect them from their enemies (Russia in particular) will cost America far more that $100 billion.

[–] MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works -3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Do elaborate on how some backwater eastern Europe shithole would cost us hundreds of billions as a inept paper tiger wastes resources on it.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

As a general rule, when governments make deals with other countries and don't do what they say, it tends to sour their negotiations with other countries. And that backwater country is the seventh largest exporter worldwide of a staple crop (it used to sell more before a certain war started). Now, America probably doesn't import much wheat from Ukraine, but there's a funny thing about globally traded commodities...

[–] MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works -3 points 2 years ago

As a general rule, when governments make deals with other countries and don’t do what they say, it tends to sour their negotiations with other countries

And I care if a bunch of eurotrash wants to leave the table for negotiation? Good riddance.

[–] Whirlybird@aussie.zone -5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

A 10% increase on the biggest part of your budget by far is a ridiculous increase.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Giving a trillion dollars to businesses with no oversight is also a ridiculous expendititure, but also 10 times more than this and happily supported by the Republicans. Or the tens of trillions spent in the Middle East over the last couple decades. This relatively minor expense is cheap political good will with a massive ROI.

[–] Whirlybird@aussie.zone 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Giving a trillion dollars to businesses with no oversight is also a ridiculous expendititure, but also 10 times more than this and happily supported by the Republicans.

That's not funding a proxy war though. Kinda different.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Sometimes the only options are war or capitulation. I guess if Ukraine had just stopped...existing...next to Russia this could have all been avoided. How foolish of them.

[–] Whirlybird@aussie.zone 1 points 2 years ago

Those aren't the options available to America though. America wouldn't be "capitulating" by not sending $100bil along with weapons and military vehicles to ukraine.