- 05 May 2024 15:24
#15314345
I was born in Ukraine but have been living in the UK for ten years. I don’t quite understand why the US and NATO countries don’t send military support to my native country. Why does the US allocate 60 billion dollars with only a fraction sent to Ukraine? After all, the US is going to have all the money.
I suppose none of European politicians intended to help Ukrainians fight against Russians. American officials benefit only from a low-intensity conflict so they support Ukraine just to keep it legitimate. Thus, politicians easily raise their approval rating and win voters’ credibility without much investment.
No one talks about sending their own troops. That’s fine but would it be the end of the world if the taxes and prices get a bit higher for Americans? It would certainly help them win the war against Russia.
To me, the answer is obvious. Supporting someone to actually win a war is different. It would take a lot more effort, and Americans are not ready for that because they’re greedy and don’t care about what happens to other nations. They think only in terms of profit and could never sacrifice anything for others.
Notice how slow the weaponry and military equipment is delivered: a few weeks or months to receive the supplies. Ukraine can’t wait that long. However, the allies, instead, say they have no way of accelerating manufacturing. That’s nonsense: one could easily build a couple more factories and buy new industrial equipment.
If I’m wrong, and the US and NATO really care about Ukraine’s victory, then, when the country is on the brink of a loss, why did they still allocate only 60 billion? The US GDP is 25,6 trillion dollars a year. Then, isn’t this just a penny for Americans overall? Mustn’t they support Ukraine with at least a couple trillion dollars, given its contribution to the fight against Russia?
https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2024 ... -will-it-w
I suppose none of European politicians intended to help Ukrainians fight against Russians. American officials benefit only from a low-intensity conflict so they support Ukraine just to keep it legitimate. Thus, politicians easily raise their approval rating and win voters’ credibility without much investment.
No one talks about sending their own troops. That’s fine but would it be the end of the world if the taxes and prices get a bit higher for Americans? It would certainly help them win the war against Russia.
To me, the answer is obvious. Supporting someone to actually win a war is different. It would take a lot more effort, and Americans are not ready for that because they’re greedy and don’t care about what happens to other nations. They think only in terms of profit and could never sacrifice anything for others.
Notice how slow the weaponry and military equipment is delivered: a few weeks or months to receive the supplies. Ukraine can’t wait that long. However, the allies, instead, say they have no way of accelerating manufacturing. That’s nonsense: one could easily build a couple more factories and buy new industrial equipment.
If I’m wrong, and the US and NATO really care about Ukraine’s victory, then, when the country is on the brink of a loss, why did they still allocate only 60 billion? The US GDP is 25,6 trillion dollars a year. Then, isn’t this just a penny for Americans overall? Mustn’t they support Ukraine with at least a couple trillion dollars, given its contribution to the fight against Russia?
https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2024 ... -will-it-w
- By litwin
- By Tainari88
- By Potemkin