News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Zelensky leaves White House after angry meeting by jonathanstrange on Friday February 28, 2025 @04:12PM (#43211012)
The USSR never acted even half as hostile as Russia is acting towards the whole world, including the US and UK right now. Maybe you're not aware of that but Russian state TV routinely discusses the nuclear annihilation of the UK and the US, not just that of Europe. Current rhetoric from the Kremlin is way more hostile than it ever was during Cold War.

You better put a stop to that by showing strength. Unless you want ignore history, that is.

Re:Zelensky leaves White House after angry meeting by soerxpso on Friday February 28, 2025 @04:15PM (#43211089)
The claim you're making is ludicrous. We don't show strength by giving away all of our resources on pointless conflicts that don't involve us. Even if the USSR was as nice as you pretend, Ukraine was also part of the USSR, and is being just as hostile to American interests.
Re:Zelensky leaves White House after angry meeting by jonathanstrange on Friday February 28, 2025 @04:20PM (#43211208)
Then your government needs to shut up instead of undermining the efforts of the rest of the free world to save Ukraine.

However, it is worth noting that from a geopolitical perspective you're the one who is ludicrous.

Re:Zelensky leaves White House after angry meeting by soerxpso on Friday February 28, 2025 @04:23PM (#43211283)
That's literally what we're doing. Zelensky came to beg for more money, and we're shutting up. I don't really care if Europeans want to go die pointlessly on the frontlines for some reason.
Re:Zelensky leaves White House after angry meeting by jonathanstrange on Friday February 28, 2025 @04:28PM (#43211417)
No, unfortunately you're not shutting up. Your government is currently pursuing a crazy pro Russia agenda.
Re:Zelensky leaves White House after angry meeting by zeroCalories on Friday February 28, 2025 @04:27PM (#43211397)
We're not giving away all our resources lmao. Support for Ukraine is a relatively small part of our budget and gdp. In return for this we get to significantly weaken and discourage our enemies. For every dollar that we pour in, Russia is losing many more. Iran and China's imperialist ambitions are crushed. And none of our people even needed to die for it. You're either a fool or an enemy if you don't see why we should support Ukraine.
Re:Zelensky leaves White House after angry meeting by JohnBooty on Friday February 28, 2025 @04:45PM (#43211772)

    For every dollar that we pour in, Russia is losing many more
It also can't be stated enough when dollar amounts are talked about...

Much of the value sent to Ukraine was equipment that was already purchased and was warehoused. In a sense, that cost us nothing. Some of that equipment was already slated for replacement. The equipment that will need to be repurchased is primarily purchased from American companies.

So it burns me up when people talk about how we sent $XYZ billion dollars of aid to Ukraine without understanding that the real cost to America was far far far less.

Re:Zelensky leaves White House after angry meeting by zuppy on Friday February 28, 2025 @04:33PM (#43211521)
oh, that’s nice. tell me what country was the only one who invoked article 5 of the nato treaty? and which countries helped them? and now the the situation has reversed what does that country do?
Re:Zelensky leaves White House after angry meeting by inglor_cz on Friday February 28, 2025 @04:34PM (#43211541)
"Ukraine was also part of the USSR, and is being just as hostile to American interests."

What does that even mean ... ?

The former Soviet Bloc was under the yoke of the central committee in Moscow. The people involved had no say in the politics of the central committee, they were coerced. But once its power failed, the newly free countries mostly turned their backs on Russia in a hurry. Only Belarus stayed in the orbit.

Contemporary Ukraine (or Lithuania, or Georgia) is not hostile to the US in any meaningful sense.

Re:Zelensky leaves White House after angry meeting by JohnBooty on Friday February 28, 2025 @04:40PM (#43211670)

    giving away all of our resources
You think $100-$200bn is "all of our resources?" I realize you're not being literal, but it's more like "less than 1% of our resources."

https://usafacts.org/articles/how-much-does-the-us-spend-on-...

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crew8y7pwd5o

Reliable estimates put our total spend (over 3+ years) as $120-$180bn.

The annual US military budget, $820bn (13% of the total government budget) or more like $2.4 trillion during that timespan.

But even that purported $100-$200bn spend perhaps overstates the cost. Some was cash, some was equipment. The equipment sent their way was already bought and paid for. Much of it was later in its lifespan. And the US military obviously buys American whenever feasible, so money spent replacing that equipment stays in America. So the amount of money "spent" by America on this venture is highly debatable, with the real number being lower than those $100-$200bn totals.

    We don't show strength by blah blah blah
Really? Because Russia looked weak as hell there, unable to conquer a small country that is using a fraction of our old stuff (and a hell of a lot of heart and ingenuity) that was gathering dust in warehouses. It certainly made it clear that in conventional warfare the distance between our two countries is rather vast.

    pointless conflicts that don't involve us
I mean, people definitely said that when Germany invaded Poland. We shouldn't get involved in every conflict but we also should not ignore every conflict.

I don't think Russia is trying to conquer Europe, but they are the single largest power and they have proven to be a highly destabilizing force.