FWIW US spent less than 100B in 3 years of war, it's nothing compared to war in Afghanistan and Iraq. And it serves an important function, "every cent counts!" makes no sense here as the goal is to prevent bigger confrontation in the future
He did not. What he did say is, that should Russia start to expand the war to other countries (as is very likely if Ukraine falls), these effects will be felt by the people in the US.
That statement is obviously true. The effects of the Ukraine war could also be felt, as it affected the economy across the globe.
What he means is whatever Russia is interested in doing, Trump is motivated to agree to given his open, well-documented idolization of Putin and other dictators, making us effective allies. Your attempts to devalue OP's argument like pretending he is being too vague are quite trasparent and do not hold up to scrutiny. Instead, you need to prove why Trump's recent behavior and remarks toward Putin don't establish us as allies with shared interests.
You ought to take your own advice, buddy.
I vehemently disagree with rayiner, often, but you personally attacking them only serves to weaken your position.
Glad you see the reality. I don't care about my position but only the reality.
Like the sibling comment says, this is an embarrassing way to cap out an otherwise reasonable comment.
> You think Russia is going to nuke America if Ukraine loses the war?
jump right to the most extreme possible claim to pull from the above and _strrrretch_ it -- impeccable form! It's not even a logical fallacy, it's just lying about what the person before you said, presented as though they look foolish for saying it. Smooth, hollow, soulless stuff.
No. But can it escalate to that via cyber attacks, territorial attacks, and global warfare? Yes.
Rule number 1 of untrustworthy counterparties: They will always be untrustworthy, even if they are temporarily friendly.