‘We will adapt’ — Ukraine’s soldiers say after US intel cut

[Gunny]

Harsh words at the end. And earned, IMO.

‘We will adapt’ — Ukraine’s soldiers say after US intel cut

[jimnyc]

Then let them use alternative intelligence and continue on in their fight - without it being an open checkbook from the US taxpayers.

We have given over $300 billion to Ukraine in aid. If they could/would win the war it would be one thing at a limited cost. But a never ending war, being so heavily financed by us? I am solidly on the side of the Ukrainian people but that doesn't mean I agree with simply handing out money. Perhaps they will still work something out with minerals and/or other negotiations. But if we ain't nothing special and others can do the same - then let them get the same from others.

[Gunny]

Then let them use alternative intelligence and continue on in their fight - without it being an open checkbook from the US taxpayers.

We have given over $300 billion to Ukraine in aid. If they could/would win the war it would be one thing at a limited cost. But a never ending war, being so heavily financed by us? I am solidly on the side of the Ukrainian people but that doesn't mean I agree with simply handing out money. Perhaps they will still work something out with minerals and/or other negotiations. But if we ain't nothing special and others can do the same - then let them get the same from others.

Fact is we've spent about $180B and not in cash. Mostly in surplus and/or outdated equipment. The Donald likes to exaggerate.

[jimnyc]

Fact is we've spent about $180B and not in cash. Mostly in surplus and/or outdated equipment. The Donald likes to exaggerate.

300 or 180 - if others are willing to give that amount to them instead, and they can get just as good of intelligence from elsewhere - then speaking for myself, I welcome them to do so.

And if our weapons aren't any good or outdated (you know much better than I do), then they are more than welcome to get their weapons and machinery elsewhere as well.

I didn't mind sending aid of any kind to Ukraine, with limitations. An endless war being a reason to limit IMO. I think money and time is better spent on making a cease fire deal and finding a way to end this war. Otherwise it will be no more than another Iraq/Afghanistan war that we will be funding.

Alternatively, many other countries can contribute just as well collectively.

[Gunny]

300 or 180 - if others are willing to give that amount to them instead, and they can get just as good of intelligence from elsewhere - then speaking for myself, I welcome them to do so.

And if our weapons aren't any good or outdated (you know much better than I do), then they are more than welcome to get their weapons and machinery elsewhere as well.

I didn't mind sending aid of any kind to Ukraine, with limitations. An endless war being a reason to limit IMO. I think money and time is better spent on making a cease fire deal and finding a way to end this war. Otherwise it will be no more than another Iraq/Afghanistan war that we will be funding.

Alternatively, many other countries can contribute just as well collectively.

Sorry, not buying what Trump is selling. Russia is and always has been an enemy of the West. PERIOD. Still is. Suddenly changing allegiance from steadfast, historical allies to the enemy has a name.

Right and wrong didn't change because the idiot in the WH did.

[jimnyc]

Sorry, not buying what Trump is selling. Russia is and always has been an enemy of the West. PERIOD. Still is. Suddenly changing allegiance from steadfast, historical allies to the enemy has a name.

Right and wrong didn't change because the idiot in the WH did.

I never mentioned Trump. I solely gave my own opinion on the matter. YOU brought up Trump when I mentioned 300 billion, which is on TONS of sites that have barely a mention of his and certainly no direct quotes of any kind. The CFR states $175 + $20 in direct aid for a total of $195. But my point was the same.

Ok, so your way - at WHAT point is enough spent to be enough? How many weapons and for how many years if the war continues?

Folks can feel free to back without limitations and with an open American checkbook, I simply disagree.

And I would say the same darned thing no matter who is in the WH. I don't think we should EVER commit to anything involving a war for an indefinite period, nor have an open checkbook for any other country.

If you think I am somehow I am taking Trump's side out of any of this, save it, not the case. I was 100% on board even when Biden was in office. But if knocking down my opinion and calling it Trump's is the route

[Mr. P]

I'm with Jim on this regardless of how much money Or weapons we give Ukraine they cannot win In my opinion.

Why?? because Zelinsky has a major problem with human resources and he knows it! His ultimate goal is to have US forces in his country, Wrong! That dog don't hunt for me!

This is on the doorstep of the EU if they haven't learned anything since World War ii, that's on them and very well may lead to WWIII if not handled properly! The European Union are the ones that need to step it up!

[jimnyc]

I'm with Jim on this regardless of how much money Or weapons we give Ukraine they cannot win In my opinion.

Why?? because Zelinsky has a major problem with human resources and he knows it! His ultimate goal is to have US forces in his country, Wrong! That dog don't hunt for me!

This is on the doorstep of the EU if they haven't learned anything since World War ii, that's on them and very well may lead to WWIII if not handled properly! The European Union are the ones that need to step it up!

I am definitely not on board for any troops on the ground, that's for sure.

Other than that, my main beef is just the open ended paycheck to come if things continue as-is, and then the war continuing as-is. I wouldn't be for simply funding them endlessly in the hopes that someday they may come out on top.

[Mr. P]

I am definitely not on board for any troops on the ground, that's for sure.

Other than that, my main beef is just the open ended paycheck to come if things continue as-is, and then the war continuing as-is. I wouldn't be for simply funding them endlessly in the hopes that someday they may come out on top.

It's like Preqo Jim. The old commercial for the spaghetti sauce "it's in there.".

[Gunny]

I never mentioned Trump. I solely gave my own opinion on the matter. YOU brought up Trump when I mentioned 300 billion, which is on TONS of sites that have barely a mention of his and certainly no direct quotes of any kind. The CFR states $175 + $20 in direct aid for a total of $195. But my point was the same.

Ok, so your way - at WHAT point is enough spent to be enough? How many weapons and for how many years if the war continues?

Folks can feel free to back without limitations and with an open American checkbook, I simply disagree.

And I would say the same darned thing no matter who is in the WH. I don't think we should EVER commit to anything involving a war for an indefinite period, nor have an open checkbook for any other country.

If you think I am somehow I am taking Trump's side out of any of this, save it, not the case. I was 100% on board even when Biden was in office. But if knocking down my opinion and calling it Trump's is the route

Nowhere have I ever stated we should fund Ukraine. I was for loans, then when it came up, the trade for rare Earth resources. Regardless President. That's a fair business deal. We've done more for less "in the name of freedom and democracy" when the lines of the latter were far less starkly clear. I made that statement long before Biden left office.

I would probably disagree with your opinion anyway if it was applicable, but it no longer is.

I brought Trump into it regardless who does or does not like him. This is his play and it's a dick play.

[jimnyc]

Nowhere have I ever stated we should fund Ukraine. I was for loans, then when it came up, the trade for rare Earth resources. Regardless President. That's a fair business deal. We've done more for less "in the name of freedom and democracy" when the lines of the latter were far less starkly clear. I made that statement long before Biden left office.

I would probably disagree with your opinion anyway if it was applicable, but it no longer is.

I brought Trump into it regardless who does or does not like him. This is his play and it's a dick play.

Fair enough. But my opinion isn't his dick play. If one wants to somehow equate so, then so be it.

And I think my opinion is quite applicable. Cool if you disagree with it though.