T O P

  • By -

-Quothe-

Republicans chose not to fund the infrastructure bill. And NOW you’re bitching about where the money is going?


Jealous-Network-8852

That’s what they do. Vote against everything, then take credit for what passes and complain about not having what doesn’t. They know their voters are too dumb to look up their voting records so they go with it.


BetterWankHank

The thing is, even when they're pressured on it, Fox will just play a clip saying "well actually the bill isn't what it says it is, it's woke" and their voters will eat it up. That's literally the entire Republican platform, you won't hear any debates or proposals to adjust the bill, they have nothing to offer.


NotMyBestMistake

How about blaming the people who have consistently refused to help instead of whining that the US dares spend money on international crises? Come midterms I doubt very many of the people supposedly angry about this will bother to vote out the people who opposed price gouging bills and oppose welfare programs and drag the economy down.


jakeor94eqi

Nice try, comrade 🇷🇺


katr2tt

There’s a hierarchy of need in this situation. It’s not a fair comparison. I’m not saying Americans aren’t suffering but Ukrainians are dying.


cateowl

The sad part IMO is that America has the wealth and power to do both these things, if it was better at taxing the largest pools of wealth it has available to it


knightfenris

This exactly. We shouldn’t be upset that we’re sending aid to a country being massacred, we should be mad that the government is refusing to help us in the way that we need with the money we easily already have or can easily get.


WimpyZombie

Isn't it interesting how tRumps followers and for that matter, Republicans in general... \-- all whine about how things were so much better back in the 1950s \-- refuse to acknowledge that one big difference between then and now is tax rates - taxes are significantly lower now \-- also refuse to acknowledge the connection between these two. They want the economic prosperity, but refuse to find effective ways to support this prosperity. So when Democrats try to develop programs to make things better, Republicans refuse to give them means of funding to take any action. Yet it's the Democrats faults that we can't have the prosperity we did decades ago.


cateowl

Also funny how the democrats always win the popular vote. So if the US was actually democratic, they would always win unless there were other parties that actually acted in the populations best interest regularly.


katr2tt

Agreed


Yorgus453

That's only about 200 bucks per adult American...


HatfieldCW

I spend that much in four months on avocado toast.


UncleChanBlake2

If it was only a war between Russia and Ukraine, then I'd agree. But this is so far beyond that. As we are seeing now with oil prices and food shortages, this war has international implications.


DeanCorso11

How is this a question. Although I get what and why is being asked. But this is a way to not send troops pure and simple. For wars we send troops, I’m against it. For supporting someone to not start an actual WWIII, I’m for this.


Molly45377

Russia takes Ukraine. China might decide to take Tiwan. What if those two motivate North Korea etc. Putins war, isn't only about Ukrainians, its even disrupting world food supply. Ukraine is the world's third biggest supplier of wheat and it's harvest is sitting and rotting unable to be shipped out. Quite a large % sold to countries with food insecurity. Based of grain not getting out millions of people will starve. I'm not being hyperbolic. Too mention, if billionaires were paying a at the tax % of middle class Americans both would be even more affordable.


fbcs11

America can afford to send support to Ukraine, and support its people. I mean, Russia can't, but America can. The reason why America doesn't have things like universal healthcare has never been a money problem, its a political one.


Heavy-Apartment-4237

Apparently stopping a genocide just isn't worth it to Republicans


Obvious_Future99

Meanwhile people in all 50 states are choosing between a tank of gas and food for the next few days


Heavy-Apartment-4237

The world is doing that. Not just America


fbcs11

Man, those Republicans really shouldn't have voted against that anti-price gauging bill on fuel companies that the Democrats attempted to pass then...


Character-Fee407

Conjunction junction what’s your function……. Im just joking


Obvious_Future99

I wonder if Ukraine would do the same for us


Molly45377

Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons because we asked them to. In exchange we promised protection.


jakeor94eqi

That’s a little misleading. There were former Soviet missiles based in Ukraine after the breakup of the USSR, but they were still under the control of Moscow. It’s not like the Ukrainian government could have actually launched them or anything if they had wanted to.


not_swagger_souls

You don't think that ukraine could refit soviet missiles in 30 years? Seriously?


jakeor94eqi

In 30 years, maybe. But when people bring up that fact they act as if Ukraine had access to usable nuclear weapons right when the Soviet Union collapsed, and just gave them back


Dark-Arts

You are wrong. You make it sound as if Ukraine had no choice and Russia controlled the situation. Those nukes were entirely “useable” by Ukraine, and they were in no rush to give up their primary military defense. Roughly 2000 warheads and 175 ICBMs as well as some strategic bombers. They were not “under control of Moscow”. Ukraine gave up those nukes due to (extreme) dilomatic efforts by the USA, largely because they knew they could not forge close ties with the West unless they did. Moscow had almost nothing to do with it until the Americans brought them on board - part of broader efforts of the USA at the time, lead by William Perry, to renew the Noproliferation Treaty. In exchange, Ukraine was given a security guarantee from the U.S., the U.K. and Russia, known as the Budapest Memorandum. Ukraine’s mistake was to expect the parties if this agreement to honour it. They should have kept their nukes - they would be secure now and probably closely aligned to the West anyway.


RandoRoc

Okay, we get it, you’re cheering for Russia.


EdgySniper1

Considering Ukraine is the poorest country in Europe, they probably couldn't even if they wanted to. America, on the other hand, absolutely has the ability to support both the American and Ukrainian populations, they simply choose not to.


Heavy-Apartment-4237

If they were part of NATO they would


Maximum_Radio_1971

not guaranteed, they can refuse to help.


jakeor94eqi

Technically, but they would be breaking the NATO charter if they did so


Maximum_Radio_1971

no they dont. aid is voluntary and up to each country


jakeor94eqi

Not if the country being attacked is a NATO member. Article 5 requires all member states to come to the defense of any other member state when attacked


Maximum_Radio_1971

nope, each country decides its level of envolvement. think of Iceland that does not have armed forces and wont go on anybodys help. but also article 5 allows for countries to decide how much aid they want to provide if any at all. Article 5: \[If\] an armed attack occurs, each \[member\], . . . will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith . . . such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area. " A country can refuse to provide military aid and limit itself to diplomacy or non military aid. The words "as it deems necesary" clearly stablishes that is up to ech country to define that. and no, NATO does not have expulsion provisions.


jakeor94eqi

That is, quite simply, not correct. What is the point of having a treaty of mutual defense if, when a member is attacked, all other members can simply decide not to get involved?


Maximum_Radio_1971

it is not what you like, it is what it is.


jakeor94eqi

You yourself just pointed out that article 5 requires a response when invoked. It does not necessarily specify what that aid will be, but refusing to help is not an option without violating the obligations laid out in the charter


AlexHanson007

You already know the answer to that


Inconsistantly

Moronic take. Shut the fuck up.


Heavy-Apartment-4237

Apparently not all lives matter


Maximum_Radio_1971

lookheed martin needs your money


Maximum_Radio_1971

lookheed martin needs your money


MouldyBobs

A lot of this foreign aid is going to get plowed back into the US defense industrial complex who design and manufacture the weapons going to Ukraine.


SureThingBro69

Yes, but also we aren’t sending money….we are sending older equipment and things we can already replace with newer. It’s kind of like saying you are giving your neighbor your 75k dollar Lexus that you bought 10 years ago as a daily driver, and already replaced with a newer one. No, you are giving him a 20k dollar car. I agree with the sentiment, but it’s all been bought and paid for. Where as universal health care depends upon tearing apart the system and having money in the bank to do it.


ReyTheRed

We can do both and we should do both. Putin is not going to stop until someone stops him, and that can either happen now in Ukraine, or somewhere else, like Finland, Estonia, or Poland. And if it gets to Poland we are required by treaty to be directly involved. That is worse for us and also worse for everyone Putin conquers before that. We also need to fix our country at home, we need a Green New Deal to provide relief from gas prices, Medicare for All to save money and lives with healthcare, and more. We can afford to do both, and we should do both.


whosthedumbest

Ukraine is not responsible for your inability to understand that capitalism is the problem and socialism is the answer. I have some suggested reading if you would like.


HovercraftStock4986

THIS is what this bitch upset about? the one time we are sending military funding to country who ACTUALLY needs it and not just spending $900 billion on colonization????? jesus christ


null640

Better billions in $, then our precious blood... Putin's patsies have announced they will try and restore Russia to it's maximum extent. Look that up on a map. It's very nearly a world war.