Zelensky meets with Biden...

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Dondilion

I am specifically asking about a special Inspector general. This is irrespective of the imbecile Rand.

Do you want no one to oversee the taxpayer's fund?

DOD and State both have an IG.

[donquixote99]

So, for totally soft, based on nothing but opinion reasons, you want to cut Ukraine off. It is nothing but soft opinion to call Zelenski 'entitled,' and thnk opinions of personal style should drive policy. It is nothing but soft opinion to imagine the emotional reactions of millions to the existence past and present to some vague number of 'Ukrainian Nazis' should drive policy. All I see here is rationale, motivated reasoning, a reaction against Ukraine, and for Russia although that is left unstated. The conclusion is driving the argument. It certainly isn't data based.

[Dondilion]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

So, for totally soft, based on nothing but opinion reasons, you want to cut Ukraine off. It is nothing but soft opinion to call Zelenski 'entitled,' and thnk opinions of personal style should drive policy. It is nothing but soft opinion to imagine the emotional reactions of millions to the existence past and present to some vague number of 'Ukrainian Nazis' should drive policy. All I see here is rationale, motivated reasoning, a reaction against Ukraine, and for Russia although that is left unstated. The conclusion is driving the argument. It certainly isn't data based.

Are you against the call of the embecile Rand for a Special Inspector General?

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by Dondilion

Are you against the call of the embecile Rand for a Special Inspector General?

Nothing new nd his usual grandstanding. He played a similar card last year and then the amount was a lot higher, $40 Billion.

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/...ector-general/

[Dondilion]

Originally Posted by Rajoo

Nothing new nd his usual grandstanding. He played a similar card last year and then the amount was a lot higher, $40 Billion.

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/...ector-general/

So the newness or lack thereof makes it wrong.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Dondilion

So the newness or lack thereof makes it wrong.

Are you against the aid or what you perceive to be a poor audit trail for the aid? I think you're pretending to be the latter while actually the former.

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by Dondilion

So the newness or lack thereof makes it wrong.

I was not commenting on right or wrong, just that Rand Paul has sang this tune before. So not breathtaking news to me. Usual funding games played by the GQP aligned members of Congress.

As to Ukraine itself, I do believe that funding Ukraine is a very good idea to keep Putin busy and broke. I am pro Democracy, pro Democratic.

[Oerets]

As I see it....

Plain and simply put.

A country with no aggressiveness willing to give away it's nukes when asked. With assurances of protection BTW!

Only wanting to live peacefully within it's borders. Wanting to expand it's interaction in a peaceful way with the rest of the world.

Invaded raped and pillaged by Putin's Russia. With made up excuses by him also BTW!

This is when the countries of the world need to be deciding is their word worth anything.... Or do we take the cheaper easy way out with weak excuses.

Having in my past found the need more than a few times of standing up to more than one bully. Found out long ago it is stand up or bow down! I choose to stand up and confront ever time. Bully's only respect strength see weakness in other wanting to engage in negotiating.

[whell]

The bottom line is this: no one wants Ukraine to lose the war with Russia. Do the Ukrainians have a realistic chance of "winning" the war with Russia? Most would say no, but that's another discussion.

I think the right side of the GOP would fall into line on Ukraine war funding if there were legitimate commitments to defend our own borders. The migrant crisis continues to intensify along the southern US border, and no one seems willing to constructively address it.

According to NBC News:

The number of all people, including U.S. citizens, on the terrorist watchlist who had been stopped at the southern border as of July this fiscal year was 216, compared to 165 in all of fiscal year 2022. The number of border crossers on the watchlist was higher in fiscal year 2019, at 280.

And those are the ones we know about. There are likely many more that we don't know about that have entered the US.

I think if there's some "give" on US border security, there will be a lot less resistance to Ukraine war funding.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

The bottom line is this: no one wants Ukraine to lose the war with Russia. Do the Ukrainians have a realistic chance of "winning" the war with Russia? Most would say no, but that's another discussion.

I think the right side of the GOP would fall into line on Ukraine war funding if there were legitimate commitments to defend our own borders. The migrant crisis continues to intensify along the southern US border, and no one seems willing to constructively address it.

According to NBC News:

The number of all people, including U.S. citizens, on the terrorist watchlist who had been stopped at the southern border as of July this fiscal year was 216, compared to 165 in all of fiscal year 2022. The number of border crossers on the watchlist was higher in fiscal year 2019, at 280.

And those are the ones we know about. There are likely many more that we don't know about that have entered the US.

I think if there's some "give" on US border security, there will be a lot less resistance to Ukraine war funding.

Bullshit. MAGA's affinity towards Russia and Putin and their enmity toward Ukraine and Zelensky have exactly zero to do with our southern border. MAGA simply loves authoritarianism and hates democracy. They also know that the feeling is mutual (Putin loves Trump and Zelensky (rightly) does not trust Trump who (through his minions in the House) is still trying to float the discredited Burisma story that Rudy concocted (and which led to Trump's first impeachment).

Moreover, Republicans have no real desire to control the border and fix immigration. It's all part of their performative schtick and an outlet for their hatred of "the other." They can't afford to solve the problem as it would result in the loss of an important wedge issue. Had they really wanted to do something, they could have done so years ago during the Dubya administration when "comprehensive immigration reform" was on the table, but the nativist knuckledraggers in the party (with a big assist from Rush Limbaugh) put the kibosh to it.