Gonna shoot straight, and yes, I have no connections with Ukraine, or Russia. I'm an American first and foremost.
I have no issue that we have given Ukraine money and I understand that the federal government gives our money away all the time. In the grand scheme of things, $45 billion is a mere drop in the bucket of federal expenditures.
My issue has been, and remains, is that the Democrats, and their fellow GOP Unipartyists, have prioritized Ukraine's border and sovereignty over our own. We are told that we don't have the money to secure our southern border, yet we have enough to send to Ukraine so that they can defend theirs. I saw a report yesterday that stated there were an estimated 250,000 crossings last month. That's a quarter of a million people in 31 days... That, my friend, is also an invasion. $45 billion could build a lot of wall and employ quite a few border patrol agents.
I understand that you and Red Square have deep connections to Ukraine, and I get it, and I respect that. I just see higher priorities for the government that is supposed to represent the American people.
I agree absolutely about the border, but it's not necessary to sacrifice one to do the other. We could (okay, they should) have spent considerably less and still supported both border security and aid to Ukraine. Why not do both like in the old Miller Lite commercials?
Gonna shoot straight, and yes, I have no connections with Ukraine, or Russia. I'm an American first and foremost.
I have no issue that we have given Ukraine money and I understand that the federal government gives our money away all the time. In the grand scheme of things, $45 billion is a mere drop in the bucket of federal expenditures.
My issue has been, and remains, is that the Democrats, and their fellow GOP Unipartyists, have prioritized Ukraine's border and sovereignty over our own. We are told that we don't have the money to secure our southern border, yet we have enough to send to Ukraine so that they can defend theirs. I saw a report yesterday that stated there were an estimated 250,000 crossings last month. That's a quarter of a million people in 31 days... That, my friend, is also an invasion. $45 billion could build a lot of wall and employ quite a few border patrol agents.
I understand that you and Red Square have deep connections to Ukraine, and I get it, and I respect that. I just see higher priorities for the government that is supposed to represent the American people.
I remain
Dr. Chicago
Forty-five billion here, forty-five billion there: it soon adds up to real money.
With a remaining $1,655,000,000,000, much of which is dedicated to fighting "climate change," it seems there are plenty of other things that could be sacrificed for border security.
I don't know why Ukraine is seen as the only disposable option that must be abandoned to shore up border security. The only thing I can see is that it's reflexive resentment on the part of some representatives based on Biden abusing his power to take advantage of Ukraine. This would amount to cutting off aid for Ukraine because they were extorted by a corrupt US senator.
With a remaining $1,655,000,000,000, much of which is dedicated to fighting "climate change," it seems there are plenty of other things that could be sacrificed for border security.
I don't know why Ukraine is seen as the only disposable option that must be abandoned to shore up border security. The only thing I can see is that it's reflexive resentment on the part of some representatives based on Biden abusing his power to take advantage of Ukraine. This would amount to cutting off aid for Ukraine because they were extorted by a corrupt US senator.
Oh, goodness no, Comrade; Ukraine isn't by any means the only disposable option that could be abandoned to shore up the security of the United States. Ukraine is only the topic that captivates your interest, seemingly to the exclusion of all else (and on a web site dedicated to satire and parody).
If you'd take off your Ukraine glasses you might find that many—if not most Americans—would reflexively like to cut Federal expenditures down to the bone, reduce the size and authority of the Federal government and dump all the the vast waste of its woke programs that are designed to push our nation into third world status by destroying everything that made the U.S. a great power.
For some, Ukraine merely serves as an obvious example and even a symbol of how the corrupt Biden administration (and its hidden overseers) pour money overseas while ignoring painfully obvious yet easily solvable problems at home.
You're focused solely on Ukraine. Fine, but not everyone shares the sense of urgency you feel compared to the urgency demanded to stop the damage occurring here at home before the United States becomes too powerless and rudderless to render foreign aid to any nation.
To say that the priorities of the Biden administration are insane, perverse and destructive would be an understatement. The Biden administration is a reckless spender, and there's nothing reflexive about taking issue with any aspect of that recklessness.
With a remaining $1,655,000,000,000, much of which is dedicated to fighting "climate change," it seems there are plenty of other things that could be sacrificed for border security.
I don't know why Ukraine is seen as the only disposable option that must be abandoned to shore up border security. The only thing I can see is that it's reflexive resentment on the part of some representatives based on Biden abusing his power to take advantage of Ukraine. This would amount to cutting off aid for Ukraine because they were extorted by a corrupt US senator.
Oh, goodness no, Comrade; Ukraine isn't by any means the only disposable option that could be abandoned to shore up the security of the United States. Ukraine is only the topic that captivates your interest, seemingly to the exclusion of all else (and on a web site dedicated to satire and parody).
If you'd take off your Ukraine glasses you might find that many—if not most Americans—would reflexively like to cut Federal expenditures down to the bone, reduce the size and authority of the Federal government and dump all the the vast waste of its woke programs that are designed to push our nation into third world status by destroying everything that made the U.S. a great power.
For some, Ukraine merely serves as an obvious example and even a symbol of how the corrupt Biden administration (and its hidden overseers) pour money overseas while ignoring painfully obvious yet easily solvable problems at home.
You're focused solely on Ukraine. Fine, but not everyone shares the sense of urgency you feel compared to the urgency demanded to stop the damage occurring here at home before the United States becomes too powerless and rudderless to render foreign aid to any nation.
To say that the priorities of the Biden administration are insane, perverse and destructive would be an understatement. The Biden administration is a reckless spender, and there's nothing reflexive about taking issue with any aspect of that recklessness.
Then we certainly agree on the leftist agenda and its effects. In that context, I don't see border security and support for Ukraine as mortal enemies, and it seems you don't, either. However, the two issues are often cast as either/or in the form of a false dilemma, and my concern is that this is being done by representatives who vote on funding. You support Ukraine? Well, you're obviously opposed to border security. You want a secure border? The only way to get it is to oppose aid to Ukraine.
Also, Ukraine is hardly irrelevant and expendable. Failure to support Ukraine now means much bigger problems directly affecting us later. So I cringe when I see representatives who should know better determined to cut aid to Ukraine as the hill to die on. Here is a proxy war which is winnable while the cause is just and we have representatives anxious to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
I'm well aware of the border crisis, including the suffering it inflicts on the other side of the border, and agree it needs securing yesterday. We can do both and should.
If you'd take off your Ukraine glasses you might find that many—if not most Americans—would reflexively like to cut Federal expenditures down to the bone, reduce the size and authority of the Federal government and dump all the the vast waste of its woke programs that are designed to push our nation into third world status by destroying everything that made the U.S. a great power
Thank you good Colonel.
The abyss, that is the United States debt, is not solely attributed to Ukraine. As you stated, Ukraine billions, when juxtaposed against the lack of care for our southern border, stands as a very potent illustration of that waste. Wasteful spending has been going on for decades. Our politicians have gotten very good at rewarding friends and key voting blocks with our money. Part of this is due to recklessness, bad politics and baseline budgeting. I personally believe that we could cut the yearly budget by 5% each year and the only people who would feel it are nameless, faceless bureaucrats. I see that as a win. We have way too much government at every level. Diminishing it's size and effects on the people would be a strike for liberty.
If you'd take off your Ukraine glasses you might find that many—if not most Americans—would reflexively like to cut Federal expenditures down to the bone, reduce the size and authority of the Federal government and dump all the the vast waste of its woke programs that are designed to push our nation into third world status by destroying everything that made the U.S. a great power
Thank you good Colonel.
The abyss, that is the United States debt, is not solely attributed to Ukraine. As you stated, Ukraine billions, when juxtaposed against the lack of care for our southern border, stands as a very potent illustration of that waste. Wasteful spending has been going on for decades. Our politicians have gotten very good at rewarding friends and key voting blocks with our money. Part of this is due to recklessness, bad politics and baseline budgeting. I personally believe that we could cut the yearly budget by 5% each year and the only people who would feel it are nameless, faceless bureaucrats. I see that as a win. We have way too much government at every level. Diminishing it's size and effects on the people would be a strike for liberty.
I remain
Dr. Chicago
"Why can't we do both?" is exactly the question Democrats asked as they spent the U.S. into a 31 trillion dollar deficit. The "we can do it all" mentality is how they grew the U.S. into a bloated bureaucracy that now seeks complete control over the people it's supposed to serve. This practice needs to come to a grinding—not gradual—halt now, and government needs to be pared down to a bare minimum now, not later.
And doing so means everything should be on the chopping block, including another open-ended proxy war, this time in the hands of an inarguably incompetent White House and Pentagon.
Ukraine is not winning the war. It is running out of soldiers and civilians alike. The costly aid to Ukraine has been only enough to delay its inevitable defeat by attrition.
Ukraine will not win with anything less than a full commitment to total war on Russia by the U.S. and NATO, which would be catastrophic and allow China and its globalist allies to fill the power vacuum left in the wake.
Any strategy that results in the smoking, irradiated remnants of the U.S., Europe and Russia is not rational unless that strategy is being guided by those who desire such results—as it may well be, given the Biden Administration's hatred of the U.S. and subservience to China.
If you'd take off your Ukraine glasses you might find that many—if not most Americans—would reflexively like to cut Federal expenditures down to the bone, reduce the size and authority of the Federal government and dump all the the vast waste of its woke programs that are designed to push our nation into third world status by destroying everything that made the U.S. a great power
Thank you good Colonel.
The abyss, that is the United States debt, is not solely attributed to Ukraine. As you stated, Ukraine billions, when juxtaposed against the lack of care for our southern border, stands as a very potent illustration of that waste. Wasteful spending has been going on for decades. Our politicians have gotten very good at rewarding friends and key voting blocks with our money. Part of this is due to recklessness, bad politics and baseline budgeting. I personally believe that we could cut the yearly budget by 5% each year and the only people who would feel it are nameless, faceless bureaucrats. I see that as a win. We have way too much government at every level. Diminishing it's size and effects on the people would be a strike for liberty.
If you'd take off your Ukraine glasses you might find that many—if not most Americans—would reflexively like to cut Federal expenditures down to the bone, reduce the size and authority of the Federal government and dump all the the vast waste of its woke programs that are designed to push our nation into third world status by destroying everything that made the U.S. a great power
Thank you good Colonel.
The abyss, that is the United States debt, is not solely attributed to Ukraine. As you stated, Ukraine billions, when juxtaposed against the lack of care for our southern border, stands as a very potent illustration of that waste. Wasteful spending has been going on for decades. Our politicians have gotten very good at rewarding friends and key voting blocks with our money. Part of this is due to recklessness, bad politics and baseline budgeting. I personally believe that we could cut the yearly budget by 5% each year and the only people who would feel it are nameless, faceless bureaucrats. I see that as a win. We have way too much government at every level. Diminishing it's size and effects on the people would be a strike for liberty.
I remain
Dr. Chicago
"Why can't we do both?" is exactly the question Democrats asked as they spent the U.S. into a 31 trillion dollar deficit. The "we can do it all" mentality is how they grew the U.S. into a bloated bureaucracy that now seeks complete control over the people it's supposed to serve. This practice needs to come to a grinding—not gradual—halt now, and government needs to be pared down to a bare minimum now, not later.
And doing so means everything should be on the chopping block, including another open-ended proxy war, this time in the hands of an inarguably incompetent White House and Pentagon.
Ukraine is not winning the war. It is running out of soldiers and civilians alike. The costly aid to Ukraine has been only enough to delay its inevitable defeat by attrition.
Ukraine will not win with anything less than a full commitment to total war on Russia by the U.S. and NATO, which would be catastrophic and allow China and its globalist allies to fill the power vacuum left in the wake.
Any strategy that results in the smoking, irradiated remnants of the U.S., Europe and Russia is not rational unless that strategy is being guided by those who desire such results—as it may well be, given the Biden Administration's hatred of the U.S. and subservience to China.
I believe that there is much we do agree upon except for my sense of urgency regarding Ukraine.
General Hodges, General Keane, General Clark, and General Petraeus are of the opinion that Ukrainian victory is somewhere between possible and inevitable. Unlike the Afghan National Army, which was a fiction on paper only, Ukrainians will fight for themselves. And before receiving significant aid they have severely bloodied the Russians well beyond the expectations of western intelligence. Even General Hodges admits to personally overestimating the Russians at the beginning of this latest invasion.
I don't have a "do it all" mentality, I have a "we can secure the border and support Ukraine" mentality which is much narrower and far less costly now and in the future.
'pelipsky asks again, "Does Mexico have a historic claim to Texas?"
Every corrupt deed done by State Department to the sovereign nation of Ukraine is replicated on Texas. Self-protection of Texas is decided by judges. Russian oligarch corruption in Ukraine is no different than the drug cartels operating in Texas. Texas is resource rich, with huge investments in ports for foreign trade, just like Ukraine.
Mexico wants to reacquisition Texas because of this wealth. The historic Mexican President Santa Anna thought those Texas Land Grants needed to be reappraised and redistributed to more suitable owners.
What is the difference? Why is Mexican violation of Texas' border not a FEDERAL act of war, just like Russian invasion of Ukraine? What happens to the financial wealth of the USSA without Texas? Texas is that critical to the rest of The Collective.
This "we can do both" argument is invalid as our State Department is doing neither - in Ukraine, or in Texas. The State Department is the problem, and the cost to humanity is beyond anything we are prepared to pay through taxes.
'pelipsky will stop thinking and just focus on tending beets in the ____. (word no longer valid.)
This "we can do both" argument is invalid as our State Department is doing neither - in Ukraine, or in Texas. The State Department is the problem, and the cost to humanity is beyond anything we are prepared to pay through taxes.
The uncontested absurdities of today are the accepted slogans of tomorrow. They come to be accepted by degrees, by precedent, by implication, by erosion, by default, by dint of constant pressure on one side and constant retreat on the other - until the day when they are suddenly declared to be the country's official ideology. ~ Ayn Rand
©* 1917 – 2022
The People's Cube, Politburo and Central Committee of the Socialist
Shadow Party, Ministry of Truth, Comrades of Armed Organs, Young Pioneer
Organizations, Komsomol, Society for Sport and Technology, Society for
Advancement of Secondary Sexual Characteristics, and other groups and collectives
of our great Socialist American Motherland.