• klieg2323
    link
    fedilink
    171 year ago

    Why is it being done?

    This is how things start. Just like with weapons assistance, first it’s a little then it’s billions on the regular. This is an increase to an already way oversized presence of a foreign continents military in a delicate situation.

    • @lemmyshmemmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      301 year ago

      It’s not a delicate situation for Ukrainians, they’re defending their freedom. Accusing the US of escalation here when Russia violently invaded it’s peaceful neighbor?

      • arcturus
        link
        fedilink
        161 year ago

        I mean the first issue here is that you think the US government actually gives a shit about humanitarian things; they’re doing this because it’ll be beneficial to them, not out of the goodness of their heart

        you really need to understand that you can’t take the US at its word when it says it’s sending soldiers to another country for moral reasons

        • @GBU_28@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          4
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          No country on the planet is any different. Just so happens the us is aligned with the global west in deciding to support Ukraine. That’s just how it is.

          At the same time NATO is consolidating membership, again, for geopolitical gain, not charity.

          Welcome to reality. Declaring the US a sane geopolitical operator is not the hot take you think it is.

          • arcturus
            link
            fedilink
            4
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            you might be surprised by how many people don’t understand this tho

        • @sin_free_for_00_days
          link
          11 year ago

          I despise the size of the US military, the size of the military budget, the corruption in the military-industrial complex, and so on. But it’s disingenuous to ignore how often, and how many places the military does show up to provide help to areas hit by things like national disasters. It’s one of the few things I do like about the military. I’m not even saying that it outweighs the damage done by US policy, just saying.

      • klieg2323
        link
        fedilink
        111 year ago

        Right, and Ukraine has every right to defend their country. The US escalating the situation by involving troops brings this from a regional conflict to a global nuclear war. The US escalating this can lead to nuclear aniahialation

      • 133arc585
        link
        fedilink
        111 year ago

        Accusing the US of escalation here when Russia violently invaded it’s peaceful neighbor?

        Do you understand what escalation means? Escalation doesn’t have anything to do with who started it. It’s a relative action: it escalates from some state. The USA is committing troops where it previously hadn’t (or, more pedantically, is increasing the number of committed troops). This is escalation.

        You can complain about Russia starting this, but you should also complain about the USA escalating the situation.

          • klieg2323
            link
            fedilink
            111 year ago

            Wtf does this have to do with the US escalating their military presence? You do realize that once the us officially get involved it’s WW3 with literal nukes, right? You don’t seriously think a territorial conflict between Russia and Ukraine is worth nuking the world over, do you?

            Remember how WW1 escalated? Treaties calling everyone into a pointless war over someone else’s conflict.

              • klieg2323
                link
                fedilink
                81 year ago

                Are you for real or are you being a troll?

                Let’s say the us gets involved. Article 5 is invoked in NATO and we get a WW1 style escalation into world war. Major nuclear powers are all involved. Someone is going to use a nuke. Maybe tactically at first but it will quickly spiral out of control. Unless something happens that renders all nukes inert, their use is all but guaranteed in WW3.

                World war is not good in any instance, regardless if it triggers nuclear Armageddon. Europe has only just recovered from 1 and 2.

                  • klieg2323
                    link
                    fedilink
                    6
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    You must have no historical understanding. I’d be happy to provide you a reading list to bring you up to speed.

                    Honestly I’m a little concerned you would say something like that in response to a statement like

                    World war is not good in any isntance

                • @CmdrShepard
                  link
                  31 year ago

                  It sounds like you watch too many action movies.

                  • klieg2323
                    link
                    fedilink
                    51 year ago

                    Sounds like you don’t understand history and don’t understand the concept of NATO.

                    Study history, it gives you the context you need to think the world isnt an action movie and actually articulate your thoughts as to the flaws in my analysis based on historical facts and current world affairs.