The front page of a right leaning publication
- Thread starter NYShoreGuy
- Start date
The passage of funding for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan were a long time coming. Thankfully this was finally passed. But this ordeal shows how Republicans cannot govern. Back in February, this funding could have been passed as well with the border bill.
While the border bill was not perfect in Hard right circles, it marked the toughest bill on the issue m. An issue that could not be resolved in administration after administration. Now there is no border bill as part of this package and the country is worse off for it.
While the border bill was not perfect in Hard right circles, it marked the toughest bill on the issue m. An issue that could not be resolved in administration after administration. Now there is no border bill as part of this package and the country is worse off for it.
What a joke to support more war and death that have no imminent (defensive) impact on the U.S.
Last edited:
It’s interesting that no official determination has never been made about who sabotaged the Nord Stream pipeline. Most Scandinavian will tell you privately that they know it was Ukraine, but that’s not for public consumption for obvious reasons.
European countries desperately want us to fund the war and relief efforts. They fear Putin but acknowledge Zelensky is no saint. I doubt we had a role in Nord Stream and I also won’t be surprised if Zelensky turns on the U.S. once the war is over.
So that’s a big qualifier “imminent”. Perhaps you won’t support any war effort until Putin invades Poland and then there will be American soldiers on the ground instead of just sending arms. But you probably would not support it at that time either since that would not be an imminent harm to the US. I don’t believe in your isolationists stances.
This funding is important for the security of all three countries.
I love the Putin talk. Once he takes out the Mighty Ukraine, who he was supposed to take down in 2-3 weeks currently in year 3, they're a threat to take over the world. If you think Putin goes into a NATO country after struggling with the Ukraine you're an idiot. Putin is evil, not stupid. Even our weakened by DEI military will kick the crap out of them, we know it and so does he. Are people more deranged about Trump or Putin.
Yes, our military is defensive in nature not offensive. I adhere to the Constitution not silly military-industrial complex. Also all these foreign entanglements is why we are hated around the world by many. Should have listened to George Washington.
If Russia is such a problem and our (not anyone else's) safety and security is at risk, then our military should be used full bore not just write a check, how elitist.
Russia attack Poland, a NATO country that actually lives up to it's NATO commitments that the U.S., as you've mentioned here plenty of times, would have to defend?
Guess you were not a history major and didn’t learn the lesson when you appease tyrants. Those who do not remember history are condemned to repeat it.
Moreover, when you have the opportunity to weaken an American enemy without having to have an American soldier lose their life, it would be idiotic not to take advantage. You really have a fundamental lack of understanding in foreign affairs. Your policy is to allow an enemy only to grow stronger. Now that’s really stupid.
Last edited:
I think it’s idiotic to continue the same failed foreign policy we’ve practiced for 80 years. Thinking that we can toss our weight around, fiscally or militarily, without any consequence.
Also love the regurgitated appeasement line. Every tyrant in history is Hitler and should be treated as such. Despite the fact that Russia is a failed petrostate and currently stuck in a forever war with a country that has the GDP of Nebraska.
what a bunch of bull. You want to talk about repeating history. America is repeating history right now, Soviet history. Political correctness and controlling the speech you use all started in the Soviet Union right before the 1920s. Speak out on that shit so America doesn’t become the next Soviet Union. You guys hate Russia but love their style. Makes no sense to me.
Weakening our enemies is fine but at what cost. You want to fund it great. How do we come up with an extra 60 billion for the Ukraine but not for our veterans, our elderly, to help reduce drug costs, etc. They’ve done good for insulin but what about the 1000 other diseases not diabetes. 60 billion for them but we can’t come up with money to help every day Americans struggling.
I have no idea what you are talking about. You think Russia was about political correctness?? lol. Companies getting cancelled? No. People were killed and are still be murdered for speaking out against Putin and the Russian government. Far different than political correctness. Such a silly comparison it’s not even worth my time pointing it out.
. I am curious are you only against the funding for Ukraine or are you all against the funding for Israel and Taiwan as well? The total package is $95 million but you choose only Ukrainian funding as objectionable. If it’s only Ukrainian funding what is the difference between Israel and Taiwan?
Fighting Russia was always bi-partisan issue. Yet, now we have people like you who have some love for Putin.
Second, this aid is military funding. This money is going to American companies that employ thousands of Americans in good paying jobs that contribute to the economy and the tax base.
Third, the weakening of Russia that has nuclear weapons and is aggressive where US and the West has an opportunity to defeat Russia through this support without having our troops on the ground is well worth the price.
Fourth, failed American policy? We are talking about Russia. Not some far off little country of Vietnam which was a French colony that we are getting involved for no reason. I can’t believe all the Russian apologists that are in this board.
Fifth I am all for taking care of Veterans and people who are in need. Just surprised that this call is coming from this crew of posters who are all about cutting benefits for the needy.
1. Can’t speak for anyone else but, yes, military aid to Israel and Taiwan is equally objectionable. U.S. coming into direct conflict with Russia, Iran, or China are three things that absolutely cannot happen. So why on earth would we want policy that increases the likelihood? Sending blank checks and armaments to these three countries does nothing but escalate.
2. Unconditionally support the war-mongers in this country or get labeled *insert negative label* apologist. Tale as old as time.
3. From an American perspective, the only people that benefit from military aid is the defense contractors that are multi-billion dollar war profiteers.
4. And yes failed American policy. What has interventionist policy against Russia or whoever else gotten us? We have an untenable illegal immigration situation because we ruined Central and South America with this attitude. This attitude is why Iran and most of the Middle East hates us.
5. And, finally, I’m not personally in the business of cutting money going to needy Americans. I’d love for once if our government spent billions on something that actually helps Americans. But when it’s a conversation about mortgage rates, drug prices, mandatory paid leave, or student loan etc., our wallets get mighty tight. But when an “enemy” needs bombing, we are just made of money. Sick of it.
All of the lobbying and special interests in Washington ensures it stays this way, sadly. The politicians are more than happy to protect their buddies in big business and take a kickback or two on the side.
I never compared anything you stated. What I said was if you're worried about history repeating itself America is becoming very Russian-like. Political correctness was a gigantic part of getting people to follow their communist ways. It's designed to get people to shut up if it goes against what the party wants.
Political correctness (PC) | Definition, Origin, History, & Facts
Political correctness, term used to refer to language that seems intended to give the least amount of offense, especially when describing groups identified by external markers such as race, gender, culture, or sexual orientation. Learn more about political correctness in this article.
www.britannica.com
1. I'm against it.
2. If I compared 95 million to 60 billion you would tell me I'm an idiot for comparing them.
3. You must be #2.
No love for Putin. He's evil, but not a top threat to the US.
As I mentioned, we did something for insulin, how about the 1000 other diseases. How about putting money towards autism and other horrible diseases that impact all but especially children. That money would be given to American companies too right? And it would help Americans. Wow what a concept.
Yes Russia has nuclear weapons. They're not going to use their nuclear weapons because they know if they did we would come and destroy them. In the meantime we've given Iran enough money to get close to having a nuclear weapon, who doesn't care about anything other than Death to America and wouldn't think twice about using it on us.
I can't believe you think it's 1955 when American and Russia were fighting for world dominance. Talk about delusional.
Every couple of years we hear social security might not be around, yet there's 60 billion, not 60 million, but rather 60 billion for the Ukraine. We have to cut because we constantly run at a deficit. Save 60 billion here, save another 20 billion somewhere else and lets add to benefits. Despite what AOC says we can't just print more money, so if you're going to spend on 60 billion on the Ukraine, somewhere needs to be cut. I'm not for cutting benefits. I'm for living within our means as a country. My credit cards would've been cut off a long time ago if I ran at a deficit year after year after year after year after year.
And they would be correct...... Why hasn't dem senate voted on this bill that passed the house in 2023 with a few democrats from red districts supporting it? Dems keep saying Republicans have offered nothing... and they would be lying.
Could they be afraid of backlash from public from opposing the only bill that has been offered that talks seriously about controlling the inflow of illegal migrants? I think so. They are playing a shell game and the public is getting scammed by the dem's positions.
Senate worked in a bipartisan compromise to give the most care and concern to the border and a person currently in criminal court as a defendant told the party to kill it as he needed it as a campaign issue.
Here is the Roll Call on final passage of that bill
Roll Call 209 Roll Call 209, Bill Number: H. R. 2, 118th Congress, 1st Session
VOTE QUESTION: On Passage, DESCRIPTION: Secure the Border Act, VOTE TYPE: Yea-And-Nay, STATUS: Passed
clerk.house.gov
That's the House Bill. No vote in SenateHere is the Roll Call on final passage of that bill
Roll Call 209 Roll Call 209, Bill Number: H. R. 2, 118th Congress, 1st Session
VOTE QUESTION: On Passage, DESCRIPTION: Secure the Border Act, VOTE TYPE: Yea-And-Nay, STATUS: Passedclerk.house.gov
