[Edward64]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

1) I think it's incredibly dangerous to start a proxy war on a nuclear country's border. Similar to how we reacted when the Soviets tried to setup shop in Cuba. Our involvement increases the chances of a war with Russia which is not good for anyone. Ukraine joining NATO will cause war.

The chance of real war with the west has definitely increased. But it increased because of the initial invasion. Let's just use the example of +50%. The real question is has the chance of war with Russia increased with western intervention, let's say another +20% or has chance decreased, let say -20%, because Russia has been stalemated, equipment used up etc.

My quote is below. So I do believe it's been reduced.

... reducing Russian threat for 5-10+ (?) years

2) Ukraine offers no geopolitical advantage to us. They will constantly shift between Russian puppet and pseudo-democracy due to their population breakdown and geographic situation. They are not a trade partner to us (outside of I guess white babies for evangelicals) or a reliable defense ally. If Ukraine goes back to being a Russian puppet state, nothing will change in this country at all.

Sure it does. Ukraine is a buffer to western allies. That's pretty strategic geopolitically. Plus Ukraine, with Russia, were the 1-2 world producer of wheat, that's a lot of leverage for countries that need wheat (China was #1). Also big on corn and seed oil.

The most recent exports are led by Corn ($6.02B), Seed Oils ($5.54B), Wheat ($3.27B), Iron Ore ($2.97B), and Rapeseed ($1.55B). The most common destination for the exports of Ukraine are Poland ($6.7B), Romania ($3.94B), Turkey ($3.02B), China ($2.6B), and Germany ($2.43B).

3) I don't want Ukraine in NATO because I don't think we should put our lives on the line for them. If you are willing to risk your life for Ukraine, they are accepting pretty much anyone with a pulse willing to fight. From the lack of takers, I assume that no one here (or pretty much anywhere in America) is willing to actually die for Ukraine. I don't blame them.

I really don't know if I want Ukraine in NATO. But I definitely want them as an ally.

If your point is US is not willing to commit boots on the ground to fight for Ukraine. That is true and I support not having boots on the ground right now.

The real point is there is not yet need for western countries to commit boots on the ground. There is a need to supply Ukraine with money, weapons, logistics, intel etc.

4) This policy of intervention we've had for 80 years has led to countless negative consequences and always leads to blowback. Do you remember the last time we armed an extremely far-right group against the Russians/Soviets?

Sure, the Soviet-Afghan war. That worked out great, and some say was an input into the fall of Soviet Union. It was a good thing.

Bad things happened 11+ years after in Afghanistan after. Who could have predicted that? Fair chance that Bin Laden and 9/11 could have happened regardless. Getting back to examples of pretty good proxy war outcomes, I presented to you Taiwan and Philippines. Two thriving countries (Taiwan more so) that are aligned to the US. Taiwan has certainly turned out to be a good bet with her technologies/foundries.

5) This plan is not working. Russia is winning, their economy is thriving, and Putin is as strong as he's ever been. At some point you have to realize your plan failed and try something different.

Ukraine was effective Year 1. Ukraine was not as effective Year 2 (they did take back some land though). Ukraine is not going to be effective Year 3 because US support is very limited now.

Depends on what you think the "plan" was. If it was to stop Russia, it was working. If the plan was to take back all the territory from 2022, stalemate. If the plan was to take back all territory + Crimea, then yeah, plan is not working.

So we'll agree to disagree here on what the "plan" was.

6) I'd rather allocate the $120 billion plus whatever else we plan on sending to ourselves. I think you could do a lot of good with that money and dramatically improve the lives of Americans.

$120B is big enough of a sum to take notice for sure. But $120B to forgive student loans vs buying time for western allies to bulk up and keep Ukraine independent? I'll take the latter.

All companies have to create a budget for the year. They make choices. From my experience and IMO, they are never optimal (give me a bigger raise). But they have to look at the bigger picture. e.g. fire a bunch of people, reallocate their total comp for investment into AI? Sure. Right now, the bigger picture is making sure the Russian threat is reduced.

That about sums it up. I don't view Russia as a threat to America under normal circumstances. They're a large petrol state with almost no influence outside their immediate region. They suck of course, but that's not our problem. We do far worse and have no business being the world police.

Appreciate it.

From my perspective, it comes down to I believe Russia is a bigger threat to US strategic interests and you don't.

Question to you: how is this different from WW2 ...

1. Why should the US have cared if Hitler took over Europe?
2. Japan attacked US because she saw US as a threat in limiting their assets, oil etc. Should the US have told Japan do what you will in Asia, so there was no need for a Pearl Harbor?