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

  • maegul (he/they)@lemmy.ml
    ·
    1 year ago

    So as someone not close to this war, and as someone who's always been open to the idea that the worst outcome for the war is for it to be drawn out for a long time, and that the west should think more clearly about what's really going on here, but also as someone who would probably have picked up a gun and prepared to die if an invading force I didn't like came for my country ... what's the alternative for the Ukrainians here? Or, do you think Ukraine should be conquered and are fighting an unjust war?

    • dumpster_dove [he/him]
      ·
      1 year ago

      Upholding the Minsk agreement would have been an option up until 2022 at least.

        • silent_water [she/her]
          ·
          1 year ago

          by all accounts, Russia held to the letter of that agreement until it was violated. what on earth are you talking about.

          • Frank [he/him, he/him]
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think they made several attempts to keep it intact, but Ukraine couldn't keep it's pet Nazis under control and they kept violating the cease fire.

        • Frank [he/him, he/him]
          ·
          1 year ago

          Christ sake. France and Germany are both on the record saying they never intended to honor the agreement and were just playing for time to arm Ukraine.

    • AssortedBiscuits [they/them]
      ·
      1 year ago

      what's the alternative for the Ukrainians here?

      Not shelling the Donbass for the past 8 years for one. That was them fucking around and the Russian invasion is them finding out.

    • VentraSqwal@links.dartboard.social
      ·
      1 year ago

      Apparently their government messed up years ago so now they all have to die. Seriously, look at the replies from hexbear to your question. The obvious answer is that they were attacked, they now have to defend themselves, and the US and Europe are helping them do that. And even if it's just to weaken Russia, it's also what the Ukrainian people would want, just like you or I would want someone to hand us a rifle if someone is attacking us.

      But they can't say that, so they have nothing they can say to this question, no answer, no solution, just what coulda shoulda, etc. They can't empathize with Ukrainian citizens protecting their land when invaded, just like you or I would do, because the US sucks. And it does, but that's besides the point. Oh well. Ukraine has some Nazis so I guess Russia gets to invade their neighbors when they feel like it and take Crimea or similar territories, like they've been doing with Georgia and other places near them for awhile now. And it's their neighbors jobs to just allow it and not ally with anyone to prevent it.

      • maegul (he/they)@lemmy.ml
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yea, I'm more or less with you. As someone curious to get to know their community better, this isn't, TBH, the best introduction/impression they could have given (ie, the replies to my question). There's a difference between whether there's any justification for Russia's acts of aggression and my actual question of what else could ordinary Ukrainians actually do, which not only requires some empathy for actual real life people being crushed under the boots of governments (something I thought Hexbear might have cared about??) but also raises the serious question, for me, about whether military force is ever morally justifiable (however much russian, ukrainian or western nations are responsible for the escalation to this).

        Instead, the reflex by those replying seems to have been to ignore all of that and abstract the situation to higher level political tennis, where avoiding that was the essential point of my question. I get that that's where the heat of the topic is for them (and probably in general), but still ... sighs.