My feed right now lol
Sad that it comes to this.
Exactly. How is this even a fucking question?
After all the fucking unjust wars initiated and fought, this one time they would just need to write a fucking check. For a war of self-defense, that is as just as it can reasonably be.
How is this even a fucking question?
Have you ever considered Ukraine could lose?
Russian is fucked. 350k dead or wounded, another million plus able-bodied men fled, the best military shit destroyed, and the oil spigot shut off to Europe.
Only thing holding that country together is the lies.
And those are starting to unravel.
Have you ever considered Ukraine could lose?
It’s a yes or no question.
Edit: Since he just downvoted without answering, we can safely assume his answer is ‘no.’
He has never considered Ukraine could lose.
Have you considered “who gives a shit” as a response to that question? Each tank destroyed in Ukraine is a tank that won’t need to be destroyed in the Baltics, in Poland or Finland.
Got another one who hasn’t considered Ukraine could lose.
Why are you people so afraid to answer this simple yes or no question?
You do realize that simplifying an issue to a “yes or no” is bad debating? Life isn’t black and white. Yes, Ukraine might lose in the end. They also might win. As I said - I don’t give a shit send them all that is possible so they can win.
You seem to thinking asking that is some gotcha but it’s not lmao. Yes, pretty much everyone has considered the possibility. What is the exact point you are trying to make here? Stop obfuscating and just say it.
Trick question. Ukraine has already lost the second Russia invaded. They’ve lost an entire generation. They could still lose territory but I don’t see them ever compromising at this point and Russia would have generations of insurgencies to deal with. Ukraine will eventually gain back their territory, if not within the current conflict.
That’s not why the West is supporting them though. They are supporting them because Russia is fighting an aggressive land grab not seen since WWII (or arguably Kuwait but not by a nuclear power) and using the exact same tactics. Every major world institution set up since WWII was to prevent exactly this type of aggression.
So, to answer your leading question, yes Ukraine could still lose the current conflict. They already have and that’s why they need the aid so that Russia can be as punished as possible to maintain the current deterrence for any other states that would seek to do the same thing.
It’s not a trick question at all.
Ukraine is still defending its territory. Ukraine thought, at one time, that it could even take back Crimea. I’m sure many of you thought it could as well. At what point do you admit when you were wrong and acknowledge you could be wrong in the future?
Now it’s clear they can’t take back Crimea, regardless of how many people believed otherwise. I’m trying to suggest to those same people that maybe, just maybe, it’s possible Ukraine is unable to defend its remaining territory as well.
The propaganda machine is in full-swing. Don’t fall victim to it, on either sides.
700 Russian casualties yesterday and the kids in the Black Sea naval war says this situation is still significantly dynamic. Failure to advance does not mean Ukraine has lost the way anymore than it means Russia has lost the war in their failure to take Avdivka. People matter. Attrition matters.
War is politics by other means. Germany lost WWI due to a political failure, not anything on the frontlines. French Soldiers were mutinying up to the day of the armistice. There is a lot of political will in Ukraine and Russia didn’t seem to get the memo that this has turned into an attritional fight. You interpret that as stalemate. They have interpreted it as needing to kill as many Russians as possible. With an average of 800 Russian casualties a day for the last two months, I’d say they are absolutely not losing this war but showing they can consistently be trusted to take the actions that are most sounds towards winning the war.
Don’t think I don’t understand propaganda and that both sides do it. You do match the Russian narratives perfectly though. Suspiciously so, actually.
Silly chitak166, don’t you realize anyone who disagrees is a Russian bot.
Should bring him for lunch at the Hungarian embassy so they can explain to his face why exactly they’re stabbing him in the back by strategizing with republicans on how to stop the aid.
Yeah I’d be keen to hear why.
Because they have Putin’s hand up their asses
This is the best summary I could come up with:
US President Joe Biden has invited his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelenskiy to the White House, days after his administration warned it would run out of money for Ukraine aid in weeks unless feuding US lawmakers act.
The meeting on Tuesday is intended “to underscore the United States’ unshakeable commitment to supporting the people of Ukraine as they defend themselves against Russia’s brutal invasion,” the White House said in a statement Sunday.
Republican senators last week blocked $106bn in emergency aid primarily for Ukraine and Israel after conservatives balked at the exclusion of immigration reforms they had demanded as part of the package.
The stakes are especially high for Ukraine, secretary of state Antony Blinken said during two television interviews Sunday, given that “we are running out of funding” for the Ukrainians.
Republican senator Mitt Romney said there was bipartisan agreement that something has to be done to address record numbers of migrants crossing into the US from Mexico.
Republican senator JD Vance said the administration had yet to justify additional aid to Ukraine.
The original article contains 606 words, the summary contains 173 words. Saved 71%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
