Paywall removed. https://archive.ph/BkIad
this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2024
482 points (97.3% liked)
World News
32372 readers
453 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 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Doesn't it take only 1 of the counties with veto power to shut this down? Why would Russia ever approve?
Edit: Had a brain fart. Thanks for the corrections. Leaving my dumb comment anyway.
NATO. Not the UN. Russia has no say into nato since it was designed to fit Russia.
designed to fit Russia.
Luckily Russia isn't fit.
Down voted for a joke based on someone else's typo... what a world we live in
Edit: that's more like it
I'm doing my part!
Russia isn't in NATO, but they are it's most successful recruiter.
Which is why I'm baffled why people still spread the myth that Russia invaded to 'stop nato aggression.'
Like, firstly you're fucking wrong, but if you want to wear that L like a medal then go for it. Russia is the biggest reason the baltics joined.
I'm not sure who would say that it was to 'stop NATO aggression', but it's not hard to imagine it as a some kind of response to NATO's continued expansion around them.
NATO hasn't been in any direct operations against Russia but they have been involved in the ME where they have been active.
I think of it a lot in the same way as the US's pacific ocean and Caribbean territorial expansion and involvement in central america as a response to the Cuban Missile crisis and Soviet posturing.
I think of it a lot in the same way as the US’s pacific ocean and Caribbean territorial expansion and involvement in central america as a response to the Cuban Missile crisis and Soviet posturing.
The "Cuban" missile crisis was started by USA putting nukes in Turkey.
yup.
load more comments
(20 replies)
load more comments
(5 replies)
NATO not the UN, Russia isn’t a member.
221 days until the next U.S. presidential election
Can Ukraine hold on that long?
If Republicans have a majority in Congress, they'll continue to support Russia.
load more comments
(136 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
That's 20 billion per year. The EU's alone defense spending for 2023 was 270bil. This is not a lot of money.
Yeah, this is less the cavalry is here and more "we've committed 3 peanuts, which is better than no peanuts". It's probably enough to help Ukraine a bit, assuming they can agree to it and fund it as committed.
It's unclear if this is humanitarian, non-lethal or general military aid, from the non-paywalled section of the article.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I know NATO doesn't have unlimited resources, but given that this is an explicit proxy war with Russia, doesn't $100bn seem kind of paltry? That makes it appear that they're planning on continuing cash infusions from the US.
EDIT: I'm saying that the US can't be relied on to continue supporting the war effort because the GOP in particular has become increasingly opposed to funding it.
It'd be so much better for everyone if we just took all of the funding going to Israel and redirected it to Ukraine. And then we nuke Israel or smthn idk
load more comments
(1 replies)
This thing has already been going on for 2 years and Russia isn't pulling out. It's a war of attrition. First side to blink loses. NATO cannot lose Ukraine to Russia. Period.
Maybe a little. The US had a bill for providing 60bn so 100bn is quite a bit more, though maybe not significantly considering all the countries involved.
might be chump change for you but likely its tied to Ukraine's conceivable ability to pay down such debt. although in reality it would likely be mostly written off when things quiet down.. especially since the moneys would be mostly spent on NATO military goods.
Well IIRC, for America, the funding money amount for Ukraine is usually just an estimate of the worth of already manufactured goods, mainly of weapons that we have stored that we weren't gonna use in the first place, and only a small portion of the dollar amount is stuff like clothes, food, etc. which would be seen as an actual cost to the US. We have sent Bradleys and M1 Abrams (and some European countries sent Leopard 2A4s? and Leclercs I think), but I'm pretty sure they weren't in use by the military and weren't planned to be upgraded for use any time soon (but I'm just guessing, I can't Google it rn, I may just be completely wrong on that).
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›