World News

31475 readers

1092 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

411

McConnell on Ukraine proxy war: "We haven’t lost a single American in this war. Most of the money that we spend, is spent on replenishing weapons, so it’s actually employing people here."[paraphrased] (edition.cnn.com)

submitted 10 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

782 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Mitch McConell says the quiet part out loud.

Exact full quote from CNN:

“People think, increasingly it appears, that we shouldn’t be doing this. Well, let me start by saying we haven’t lost a single American in this war,” McConnell said. “Most of the money that we spend related to Ukraine is actually spent in the US, replenishing weapons, more modern weapons. So it’s actually employing people here and improving our own military for what may lie ahead.”

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/4085063

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 161 points 10 months ago (278 children)

Russia invades a neighbour who dares to attempt to have stronger ties to the west.

West supplies neighbour with weapons to defend itself.

Tankies on Lemmy: "oh no, Russia is being oppressed"

[–] [email protected] 48 points 10 months ago (134 children)

At a 2008 summit, NATO stated that it would attempt to expand to include Georgia and Ukraine, despite Russia having stated that NATO membership for those countries was a red line for them. Georgia was immediately invaded by Russia in response. Imo this makes it clear that NATO membership for either of those countries was so unacceptable that Russia would rather invade.

If we assume that Russia (and Putin in particular) is acting violently and irrationally like a wild animal, why did NATO continue to agitate Russia when the only possible outcome would be violence? Surely a neutral or even Russia-aligned Ukraine would be preferable to a war-torn Ukraine? This is proof that the US and NATO don't care about the average person actually living in Ukraine, and indeed don't care about the Ukrainian state beyond it being a useful (and profitable) proxy against a geo-political rival.

To be clear, I'm not excusing Russia here, but geo-politics aren't about what's "fair" or "right", and if they were, the US would be a global pariah.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 10 months ago (36 children)

You can't write two paragraphs excusing Russia and then say "I'm not excusing Russia btw."

No country should be able to force 'my way or a military invasion' ultimatum on another non hostile sovereign state. If a government interprets a neighboring country joining a purely defensive treaty out of their own volition (no, Ukraine is not secretly run by the CIA after Maidan) as a hostile act, that only means the nationalism levels went out if control.

I'm normally very critical of the US, but neither them nor NATO can be blamed for this conflict.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

They can, because hexbear. They’re Russian apologists.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yeah yeah, I know Hexbear. I don't agree with their pro-imperialism, but at the same time they are not wrong with their socialist takes.

That's why it's worth debating them - they are not inherently evil like fascists are.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

In fascists' defence, they have no theory to fall back on, it's all just kneejerk reptilian brain brute force and brute words and brute cult of personality. That's why I am befuddled whenever I see a leftist take an offensive realist perspective :/

load more comments (34 replies)

load more comments (131 replies)

load more comments (274 replies)