this post was submitted on 08 Apr 2024
415 points (95.8% liked)

World News

38563 readers
2558 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

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.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
  • President Zelenskyy warned that Ukraine would lose the war if the US didn't send it more aid.
  • House Republicans have been stalling on a $60 billion aid package for Ukraine.
  • "It is necessary to specifically tell Congress that if Congress does not help Ukraine, Ukraine will lose," he said.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said on Sunday that his country "will lose the war" against Russia if Congress does not act to send it more aid, Agence France-Presse reported.

"It is necessary to specifically tell Congress that if Congress does not help Ukraine, Ukraine will lose the war," he said, per AFP.

For months, House Republicans have stalled on a bill containing $60 billion in aid for Ukraine, stipulating that it should also include increased funding for security at the US southern border.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] VinnyDaCat@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Republicans doing typical Republican things to no one's benefit.

That said, I don't think aid in the form of sending more arms over is right. The proper humanitarian course of action would have been to send a coalition of troops over to Ukraine to forcefully shut the situation down. So many lives would have been saved had we done this earlier.

Instead we have chosen to let the war drag on by sending weapons and supplies, letting both Ukrainians and Russians(many of which who aren't there by choice) slaughter each other.

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 11 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Sending troops over runs a huge risk of causing the war to spread, bring more, wider-spread suffering. The us would love to do just that, but it comes with such a massive risk which is why they aren't.

[–] sturmblast@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago

The USA sending troops would basically cause WWIII to kick off. No one wants that.

[–] Cuttlefish1111@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Could help Palestine in the same fashion. Send in a coalition from everywhere except key players. Get serious with retaliatory attacks on aggressors.

[–] VinnyDaCat@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It's possible yes, but you also have to consider that perhaps Russia might not have ever invaded if we had shown that we were willing to fight.

A large part of the invasion was the fact that they knew they could get away with it. They know that we're just going to watch on the sidelines, providing some support from time to time. The people scared of a World War seem to forget that World War II started while the major powers at the time allowed Poland to be conquered before doing anything.

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Except we haven't done nothing. We've provided Ukraine with a ton of aid, which has to this point paralyzed Russia. And I think we should continue to do so for the reasons you point out.

Send troops in actually starts a war between us an Russia. That's not a good thing that will decrease suffering.

[–] VinnyDaCat@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Are we not in a proxy war with Russia already by providing Ukraine with aid?

If Russia truly refuses to back down when the other major superpower of the world getting directly involved, then that says much more about the future of our world.

You're right that we've done a great deal of damage to Russia. We've decimated their birthrate for generations I imagine, but that came at the cost of Ukrainian blood. If we can take preventative measures then we should take them whenever possible, and even if it causes a major war it will possibly prevent more in the future.

[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The difference between a war and a proxy war is huge. You want to see Russian bombers over Anchorage?

[–] VinnyDaCat@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It'll happen eventually surely? You can't keep standing down from them. They will continue to take more and more if you do. At some point you will have to tell Russia no much more firmly and risk a confrontation or nuclear war. It's inevitable.

[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

At some point you will have to tell Russia no much more firmly and risk a confrontation or nuclear war.

That point is Ukraine.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 5 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Sending in troops would be extremely risky as that would be a direct war between Russia and the west, basically the start for WWIII with Nike's and other fun things.

Edith: nukes, not Nike's

[–] kromem@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

basically the start for WWIII with Nike's and other fun things.

"WWIII: Just do it."

[–] blazeknave@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

These are Russian talking points under the guise of practical middle path. Fuck you. Slava Ukraine. Don't blame them for fighting back and ignoring the fact foreign boots equal Putin's finger on the button. "Just give them a little farming land, the locals want it"

[–] VinnyDaCat@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Can't tell if you're being ingenuine intentionally or just misunderstanding.

This is far from a middle path. This is the path of aggressively standing between Russia and Ukraine. No where did I ever say that I blame Ukraine for fighting back either. They're doing what is necessary, but the fighting shouldn't have ever been necessary if other countries from around the world were willing to put their troops down and tell Russia no.

As for Putin and the nukes, I really don't get it. It's always going to be this way with Russia. Are you just going to let them take more and more? If Russia invades the rest of Europe are they just not going to fight back because Putin has the capacity to nuke them? At some point there will be a confrontation between Russia and other countries from the world. How much are people going to be willing to give up out of fear that nuclear weapons will be used?

[–] blazeknave@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Understood. I'm never going to do that, unless I'm overtly using sarcasm, so apologies for appearing to be provocative for the sake of it.

I probably misread your previous comment, now that I'm seeing you elaborate. I apologize for the vitriol, ending Russian genocide and terrorism of the free world is emotional for me.

We pretty much agree. That tone is just very apologist IMHO. Like abuse victim language - "look, you're right, wife, it sucks I'm attacking you but if everyone else didn't put me in this situation, I wouldn't be slapping you around" - it's an extreme example for simplicity but I hope it's not such a stretch that my point is lost.