How? So far, it's just costing everybody, including the US, a lot of money. What profit is there for the US in having Russia destroy entire Ukrainian cities?

If Putin thought the US profited too much from this while his own country suffered, maybe he'd stop his war. But his narrative is that the US and the entire West is suffering just as much as Russia and they'll soon give up, so victory is within sight. It's not of course; it's just bullshit to let him prolong his war for just a bit longer.

its so funny when nato fanboys cant see past their own propaganda. here you go

the us arms industry profits

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-01-21/us-arms-industry-mili...

the us gas industry profits

https://www.politico.eu/article/vladimir-putin-war-europe-uk...

all i did is google "us profits from war in ukraine"

also by "us profits" i dont mean the us people profit. the war is costing the us people a lot

in the end if ukraine wins they will be so indebted to us and nato that their independence wont be worth the paper its written on. if they lose, well its definitely gonna be shit for them. talk about being stuck between a rock and a hard place, and all for nothing. whats absolute worst for them is if they win on the battle field and putin decides to wipe them off the face of the earth out of spite. somehow the us is managing to convince ukraine that this isnt a possobilty, just like they convinced them that they will join the eu and nato. apparently putin is a very predictable monster with nuclear morals

i mean honnestly, this is a question for you, what do you see as a realistic outcome for ukraine?

It's not the US convincing Ukraine, it's Ukraine convincing the US. I don't know if you've noticed, but Zelensky is constantly asking, begging, every country to support Ukraine.

You're trying to spin this as something the US wants, but it's not. It's something Putin wanted. Zelensky and the people of Ukraine are (obviously) far more determined to defend their country than anyone else. And many European countries are mostly supporting Ukraine because their own citizens are demanding that they do so.

There's tons of popular support for Ukraine, because most people recognise the terrible injustice of the Russian invasion and the atrocities committed by Russia.

How things will look after the war is impossible to predict, but US support has helped western Europe quite a lot after WW2. And even the defeated enemies of that war, Germany and Japan, are doing extremely well because of the way they've been rebuilt after the war. In the long run, the best outcome for Russia would probably be to be utterly defeated and rebuilt the same way. But of course that can never happen because Russia has nukes.

you didnt answer my question. what is the end game for ukraine if putin decides to nuke it? you cant rebuild a nuclear wasteland. chernobil will look like an untouched nature reserve in comparison. people need to honest with ukranians in what to expect from this. this is what makes the whole situation tragic

> what is the end game for ukraine if putin decides to nuke it?

Yes, this is what Putin's propagandists are repeating all the time, threatening to use nukes not just on Ukraine but also on Great Britain and other countries. Apart from the obvious absurdity of contaminating their own land, the big question is, should we agree to all Putins says just because he can use nukes? Is there any limit on what we will do to please him?

ukraine does not have a nuclear deterrent. should we appeal to putin's morality, or give ukraine realistic expectations?

We should give nukes back to Ukraine.

you want people that came from the ranks of right sector and azov batallion to have nukes? no tnx