The United States could also become more vocal in its support for NATO membership for Ukraine… While NATO’s requirement for unanimity makes it unlikely that Ukraine could gain membership in the foreseeable future, Washington’s pushing this possibility could boost Ukrainian resolve while leading Russia to redouble its efforts to forestall such a development.
Expanding U.S. assistance to Ukraine, including lethal military assistance, would likely increase the costs to Russia, in both blood and treasure, of holding the Donbass region. More Russian aid to the separatists and an additional Russian troop presence would likely be required, leading to larger expenditures, equipment losses, and Russian casualties. The latter could become quite controversial at home, as it did when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan.
We have a top secret base there, just like Korea and Vietnam early troops usually come in and break shit you can’t let go.
No it’s because Russia is preoccupied and we’re testing near peer weapons from 3+decades ago there with little to no risk to mainland usa. It’s morally wrong sure but it does at least make sense.
I mean sorta but not really, we’re selling most stuff at a loss. The benefit is really seeing how well our stuff works against the enemy or was designed to fight. Don’t get me wrong people are getting rich but that’s from buying more weapons to replace the ones we sold.
Afaik they, as a principle, do not have nukes but retain the capability to manufacture them. Probably a good one since having nukes makes them a target of America and not having nukes also makes them a target of America and others. Every soverign state looks at what president nobel peace prize did to Libya as a reminder of what happens to states that denuclearize.
I agree. What does that have to do with Iran having nukes? I don’t consider having a deterrent to be an aggressive act on its own and its weird that that’s how you took it
So hold on, no troops in Ukraine, because they’re not NATO, but troops in Israel no problem?
Or is it because US is scared shitless of Putin? Or is it because a lot of prople sympathise eith Putin?
Maybe there’s no profit in aiding Ukraine?
We want Israel to win and we want Ukraine to be an expensive quagmire for Russia.
I want Ukraine to win, for Lebanon to be an expensive quagmire for Israel, and for Russia to burn on principle.
It’ll be the reverse.
Extending Russia, Rand Corporation 2019
https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR3000/RR3063/RAND_RR3063.pdf
Im referring to reality, not the intentions of the US
Who is “we”?
We have a top secret base there, just like Korea and Vietnam early troops usually come in and break shit you can’t let go.
No it’s because Russia is preoccupied and we’re testing near peer weapons from 3+decades ago there with little to no risk to mainland usa. It’s morally wrong sure but it does at least make sense.
I mean sorta but not really, we’re selling most stuff at a loss. The benefit is really seeing how well our stuff works against the enemy or was designed to fight. Don’t get me wrong people are getting rich but that’s from buying more weapons to replace the ones we sold.
If Putin didn’t have the nuclear card in his pocket US boots would have been on the ground in Ukraine 2 years ago.
Doesn’t Iran have nuclear weapons as well?
Not currently
They literally tested one like a week ago.
You absorb disinfo like a sponge? Citations needed.
Not that we know of, it’s possible they are getting there though.
Its because Putin has nukes.
So does Iran
Afaik they, as a principle, do not have nukes but retain the capability to manufacture them. Probably a good one since having nukes makes them a target of America and not having nukes also makes them a target of America and others. Every soverign state looks at what president nobel peace prize did to Libya as a reminder of what happens to states that denuclearize.
Iran is not threatening the USA in any meaningful way.
On the other hand, USA is constantly invading the middle east, promoting genocide and terrorism, and literally trying to nuke Iran.
I agree. What does that have to do with Iran having nukes? I don’t consider having a deterrent to be an aggressive act on its own and its weird that that’s how you took it