• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Foreign Aid bills - this would not have happened under Trump

robocop (actually)

robocop (actually)

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
The Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan aid and the so-called Tik-tok ban.

We can thank Biden and Johnson for these things.

And Haley got 16% in the Pennsylvania primary where she was not even running.
 
Saint Frankenstein

Saint Frankenstein

Wanderer From Afar
Premium Member
No, they probably wouldn't have happened under Trump, which is a big reason why I'll vote for him. A middle finger is all Biden and Johnson will ever get from me.
 
Nakosis

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
robocop (actually) said:
The Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan aid and the so-called Tik-tok ban.

We can thank Biden and Johnson for these things.

And Haley got 16% in the Pennsylvania primary where she was not even running.
Click to expand...

That's why we can't let Trump win. No war, no profit.

IDK if that is true but the threat is there. Trump has said he would end the war in Ukraine in one day. Can't have that while there is still money to be made.
 
Nakosis

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
Saint Frankenstein said:
No, they probably wouldn't have happened under Trump, which is a big reason why I'll vote for him. A middle finger is all Biden and Johnson will ever get from me.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I've always thought that the popularity of Trump was mostly to throw a middle finger at the Washington elite. The more trouble Trump gets into, the bigger that finger becomes.
 
Spice

Spice

StewardshipPeaceIntergityCommunityEquality
Nakosis said:
That's why we can't let Trump win. No war, no profit.

IDK if that is true but the threat is there. Trump has said he would end the war in Ukraine in one day. Can't have that while there is still money to be made.
Click to expand...
Sure he could -- if he sold Ukraine to Russia.
 
robocop (actually)

robocop (actually)

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Nakosis said:
That's why we can't let Trump win. No war, no profit.

IDK if that is true but the threat is there. Trump has said he would end the war in Ukraine in one day. Can't have that while there is still money to be made.
Click to expand...
Standing up for Democracy.
 
T

Tomef

Active Member
Nakosis said:
Ukraine will be sold off to multinational interests at the end of this anyway.
Click to expand...
Come on, that's just silly. If Ukraine manages to achieve an at least acceptable peace arrangement, there's no reason (other than Putin's possible opposition) why it shouldn't go through the same process as other former soviet bloc nations, i.e. a gradual reduction in corruption and other necessary steps to make accession to the EU feasible.
 
Nakosis

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
Tomef said:
Come on, that's just silly. If Ukraine manages to achieve an at least acceptable peace arrangement, there's no reason (other than Putin's possible opposition) why it shouldn't go through the same process as other former soviet bloc nations, i.e. a gradual reduction in corruption and other necessary steps to make accession to the EU feasible.
Click to expand...

Ukraine is already looking for foreign investors who can profit from the rebuilding.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/21/investing/ukraine-recovery-conference-private-investors/index.html
 
T

Tomef

Active Member
Nakosis said:
That's why we can't let Trump win. No war, no profit.

IDK if that is true but the threat is there. Trump has said he would end the war in Ukraine in one day. Can't have that while there is still money to be made.
Click to expand...
It's astonishingly simplistic to assert that because some profit from war, that is why wars begin. I know that kind of simple-minded notion is popular these days, but of the wars of the 20th C for example, which do you believe were started for the principle reason of profit?

Wars tend to be fought for geopolitical motives, to do with national identity, resources, ideological or religious clashes and so on. There's a lot of nonsense flying around about the conflict in Ukraine. The only thing that lends most of it even the appearance of credence is sheer volume. A lot of the things you mention - possible NATO expansion and so on - are only surface symptoms. Part of the picture, but a long way from being all of it.
 
Nakosis

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
Tomef said:
It's astonishingly simplistic to assert that because some profit from war, that is why wars begin. I know that kind of simple-minded notion is popular these days, but of the wars of the 20th C for example, which do you believe were started for the principle reason of profit?

Wars tend to be fought for geopolitical motives, to do with national identity, resources, ideological or religious clashes and so on. There's a lot of nonsense flying around about the conflict in Ukraine. The only thing that lends most of it even the appearance of credence is sheer volume. A lot of the things you mention - possible NATO expansion and so on - are only surface symptoms. Part of the picture, but a long way from being all of it.
Click to expand...

Ok, what is the rest? Why did Putin invade Ukraine?
 
T

Tomef

Active Member
Nakosis said:
Ok, what is the rest? Why did Putin invade Ukraine?
Click to expand...
Many reasons. Why it is happening now is primarily because Ukraine, meaning the Ukrainian people, were steadily drifting out of Russia's orbit. No longer content to have a pro-Russian puppet as president, and increasingly leaning towards Western Europe. A 12 year study prior to the first invasion in 2014 revealed negligible friction between Ukrainian and Russian speakers, even in Crimea and the Donbas. The Maidan revolt was the spark point of the whole debacle, the first move that really made it clear to Putin Ukraine was on the way to slipping out of Russia's sphere of influence. As with Belarus, maintaining a pro-kremlin and corrupt state apparatus in Ukraine is seen by Putin as crucial to Russian interests.

Ukraine first applied to join NATO in the early 90s - way before they were anywhere near to being ready for that. It has been an on/off question for successive governments since. Without an initial move into the sphere of the EU though, the necessary changes would be so hindered by the endemic corruption typical of all states that still fall under Russia's influence as to make it a proposal with an indefinite time-frame. If anything, the invasion will serve to accelerate Ukraine's application. Beyond that, though, Ukraine joining NATO - unlike Romania, Lithuania etc., is as much an emotional issue for the Kremlin as a geopolitical one. In Putin's re-interpretations of history, Ukraine doesn't really exist.

NATO expansion is a convenient excuse for Putin, and a simplistic culpa nuestra for Kremlin apologists to wave around. More of a red herring if you really want to understand Putin's motivations. There's no specific reason why it would pose any more threat than the other nation on Russia's border already in NATO, other than the Polish corridor, but without full control over the Ukrainian military NATO or not would be a moot point in any case. More importantly, an actual written agreement to deny Ukraine the possibility of ever joining NATO would gift Putin an enormous moral and ideological victory. The very idea of the west as a bloc is based on the freedom of nations to choose their associations. Ceding that to pacify Putin would be little different to appeasing Hitler over Czechoslovakia and Poland.

A more crucial geopolitical issue is access to the Black Sea. Losing Crimea ('losing' as Putin sees it, there were hardly any ethnic Russians in Crimea prior to annexation under Catherine the Great, so the notion of it being historically Russian land is absurd) has long been a thorn in Putin's side. Claiming the whole land corridor, up to and eventually including Moldova, has been a secondary goal since the war began. Other than the warped sense that Ukraine is 'naturally' part of Russia, the primary driver of the war lies in the military and economic benefits of having ocean access in the South, a major issue for a country whose main access to sea routes is in the frozen North and far East.
 
T

Tomef

Active Member
Nakosis said:
Well that profit is not going back to the Ukrainians is it.
Click to expand...
That hardly supports your notion that Ukraine is being sold off. As with any investment, of course money will enter the local economy. Jobs, mandatory local investment, sub contracts and so on are generally part of any such process.
Nakosis said:
For an example of this, look at Haiti.
Click to expand...
There's no realistic comparison to be made there.
 
Quintessence

Quintessence

Consults with Trees
Staff member
Premium Member
Sorry, I'm confused.

What's wrong with foreign aid?

Especially foreign aid that serves humanitarian, ecological, and/or domestic interests? In an era of globalism where isolationism doesn't actually work as a viable foreign policy?
 
The Hammer

The Hammer

[REDACTED]
Premium Member
Nakosis said:
Yeah, I've always thought that the popularity of Trump was mostly to throw a middle finger at the Washington elite. The more trouble Trump gets into, the bigger that finger becomes.
Click to expand...

It's sad that people think this is what they need to resort to. Electing people who act like themselves ... Children.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top