Also has this amazing comment:

Suggesting the defender in a war should just stop fighting, or that helping them is bad because if they did not have the ability to defend themselves, they’d quickly be unable to fight and the war would end with their defeat, is not anti-war. It is appeasement, and that is ultimately pro-war, because it creates a situation in which starting wars of aggression can benefit the ones who start them, which inevitably leads to more wars being started. To be against war, in the long term, one must support a situation in which starting wars is against the self-interest of those in the position to do so, and one of the clearest ways to do that is to try to ensure that those who begin wars of conquest or other such aggression, lose them.

https://hexbear.net/post/336083

  • Krause [he/him]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    doesn’t cost the US taxpayer a single cent

    …do they not know that militaries need to replenish their stocks?

  • Maoo [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    11 months ago

    They allow their understanding of the world to just be good guys vs. bad guys, and why would it ever be wrong to “help” the good guys?

    Also… extremely gullible. Haven’t learned how to do basic media literacy so they are easily pulled into bloodlust.

    • Scew [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      Also… extremely gullible. Haven’t learned how to do basic media literacy

      Yep, am living in a society where 95% of the people have this problem.

  • Tankiedesantski [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    11 months ago

    Suggesting the defender in a war should just stop fighting, or that helping them is bad because if they did not have the ability to defend themselves, they’d quickly be unable to fight and the war would end with their defeat, is not anti-war. It is appeasement, and that is ultimately pro-war, because it creates a situation in which starting wars of aggression can benefit the ones who start them, which inevitably leads to more wars being started. To be against war, in the long term, one must support a situation in which starting wars is against the self-interest of those in the position to do so, and one of the clearest ways to do that is to try to ensure that those who begin wars of conquest or other such aggression, lose them.

    Okay, you’ve convinced me. Let’s start arming Niger.

  • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    11 months ago

    appeasement

    Libs and having a completely a-historical understanding of the inter-war period. A match made in hell.

    it creates a situation in which starting wars of aggression can benefit the ones who start them, which inevitably leads to more wars being started.

    lol domino theory. It’s still amazing to me people can say this with a straight face after all the warmongering adventures NATO goes on.

    o be against war, in the long term, one must support a situation in which starting wars is against the self-interest of those in the position to do so, and one of the clearest ways to do that is to try to ensure that those who begin wars of conquest or other such aggression, lose them.

    1984 but literally. “War is Peace.” Just right out and said it.

    Also, at least some of these people must have played Civilization or an equivalent 4x game. If they saw an extremely hostile alliance encircling them they’d know they were about to be attacked. But somehow, in real life…

  • zifnab25 [he/him, any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    11 months ago

    They are sending older, used equipment worth X billion which doesn’t cost the US taxpayer a single cent. They might even save money as the government no longer has to pay for storage.

    cope

    Pure, weapon’s grade, unequivocal LIB-tier nonsense.

    Incidentally, The Pentagon’s $35 Trillion Accounting Black Hole was also actually good because it was just all old used materials / requisitioned labor that we can just not keep track of anymore.

    Listen, you idiots. You fucking imbicles. When we say we’re sending $X Billion worth of stuff, we’re not actually sending anything at all. And what we are sending is good! And also, its good for our economy! But its even more gooder for the people who are getting the stuff that we just told you is worthless. Because now they can use it to kill Orks. And when you kill and Ork it drops loot. Which is a thing that Ukrainians pick up and use to invest in their medival economy. They can build towers and barracks and alchemist labs and advance their tech tree until they can get dragons. Isn’t that what you want, you stupid fucking idiots?

    So the next time you hear someone tell you that the US is spending money on war, tell them to shut the fuck up and stop letting the US make money selling Ukraine dragons. Fucking morons.

  • privatized_sun [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    11 months ago

    To be against war, in the long term, one must support a situation in which starting wars is against the self-interest

    “self interest”

    “We need more capitalist ideology not less!” ok radlib

  • TheLastHero [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    11 months ago

    First of all, we are sending Ukraine money, called “Direct Budget Support”, because their economy and tax base has already collapsed.

    To date, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has obligated $22.9 billion of the appropriated funding for direct financial support for the Government of Ukraine’s (GOU’s) central budget.

    That’s from the Congressional Research Service in January 2023, the totalis even higher now. I am sure the famously corrupt politicians of Eastern Europe and especially Ukraine are spending it very wisely to promote freedom and democracy etc…

    To be against war, in the long term, one must support a situation in which starting wars is against the self-interest of those in the position to do so, and one of the clearest ways to do that is to try to ensure that those who begin wars of conquest or other such aggression, lose them.

    This is a subtle attempt to make war look like the obvious “clear” option, but principles of negotiation and reciprocity have historically accomplished great things in creating a more peaceful international order. Typical unipolar Yankee brainworms to see crushing all global opposition as the “clear” path to world peace.

  • Owl [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    11 months ago

    And then the military sees that it has fewer tanks and shit than it did before, and orders the most expensive and newest stuff to replenish the armory.