400 milion worth.
this post was submitted on 10 May 2024
99 points (99.0% liked)
Ukraine
8315 readers
319 users here now
News and discussion related to Ukraine
*Sympathy for enemy combatants is prohibited.
*No content depicting extreme violence or gore.
*Posts containing combat footage should include [Combat] in title
*Combat videos containing any footage of a visible human must be flagged NSFW
Server Rules
- Remember the human! (no harassment, threats, etc.)
- No racism or other discrimination
- No Nazis, QAnon or similar
- No porn
- No ads or spam (includes charities)
- No content against Finnish law
Donate to support Ukraine's Defense
Donate to support Humanitarian Aid
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
It's great that the latest US aid package is already making a difference, but I'm worried about how the next $61 billion aid package is going to get passed.
And that’s why it’d be really great if the EU got its shit together. It pains me to say it, but the US can’t really be trusted at this point in a strategic sense, due to how absolutely fucked our domestic politics are. That’s not hyperbole. The political pendulum is swinging WAY more drastically between the parties - like, yeah, we’re helping Ukraine now, but if Trump pulls out a win, I fully expect him to try to send in the US Army to help Russia steamroll Ukraine. That’s not a joke. I’m entirely serious when I say that.
More broadly, it’s kinda infuriating watching Russia retool their economy for war over the last two years while the western world has pretty much just stood around with their thumbs up their asses, in terms of strategic logistics and production capacity. The one thing I kinda thought the boomers who predominantly run shit would be good at was to remember what level of economic commitment is required to win a real, serious military conflict (and Afghanistan and Iraq don’t count - they were fully asymmetric conflicts). But it seems they can’t even do that.
The one thing I kinda thought the boomers who predominantly run shit would be good at was to remember what level of economic commitment is required to win a real, serious military conflict (and Afghanistan and Iraq don’t count - they were fully asymmetric conflicts). But it seems they can’t even do that.
Well Afghanistan and Iraq are really the only two wars which the boomers can be said to have “fought” in the sense of being the largest voting bloc, well represented in the administration - basically running things.
They were post-WW2 children so they weren’t really running things during Korea and Vietnam, or the Cold War generally. The two conflicts you mentioned are just about the two best examples of “Boomers’ Wars” you can find, so to say “they don’t count” is funny because it should at least illustrate why the current situation is not so surprising. They don’t know how to fight a war - they were born when their parents just won a fucking big one.
Not to be all: "well ackshually", but actually, my dad is the definition of a baby boom kid - born shortly after WW2, (the baby boom) and served in the navy during Vietnam.
It might be more fair to say: "They don't know how to win a war"
Hah, yeah, you have a point. I was thinking of “participated in, and generally socially aware of”, but in terms of leadership experience you’re spot on.