Skip Navigation

Posts
1
Comments
355
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • Ukraine defense spending in 2024 is $40B. It is not easy to find total number from all EU countries, but historically they give significantly less for military spending for Ukraine. There is big 50B package from EU, but it is mostly economical and over 4 years. But let me overestimate and suggest 20B as military aid for Ukraine. All together is $120B and is still less than what Russia spends and it is before accounting for purchasing parity. US, and especially EU countries should significantly increase military help for Ukraine to push back. And while EU countries increased military spending it is just not enough.

  • Well, that depends on what “normal” is.

  • To be fair, these are missiles too.

  • The Russia’s military budget is not quite clear, but for 2024 the most cited number I see is $140B. 2.5 times larger than this bill. If we include the fact that purchase parity would adjust this to even larger difference, on can see that at this point of funding Ukraine can think only about maintaining status quo at best.

  • Yes, but they look like one too.

  • Which territory US captured or wanted to capture?

  • The fact that you do not even ask such questions, shows that you are narrow minded. Such mentality leads to people thinking that “homosexuality is bad” and never even try to ask why, and never having chance of changing their mind.

  • Why you should not mentally undress the girl you fancy (or not, what difference does it make?)? Where is the harm of it?

  • Can you articulate why, if it is for private consumption?

  • Also, northern Vietnam had support from greater powers in munitions and training (USSR, China). So, indeed, very analogous situation. Also USSR had its own adventure in Afghanistan. With the same analogy where now US supported … aghmm… Talibans and Al-Qaeda .

  • USSR was one of many.

  • That does not compare advancement in pharmaceuticals at all. It only say that it has good healthcare system. Which I agree is better than in US in coverage, but that’s it. If US had universal healthcare, it arguably would be better, but it says nothing about the need to drop IP. To my knowledge US pharmaceuticals is simply leading in the world, not even comparable to Cuba. Again, comparison with USSR would be better, at least they were of comparable size, and this comparison is still in US favor by large degree.

  • Define “good”. If you define as equity, then yes, I agree. Nearly everyone was equally repressed in socialist countries. Realizing freedom and human potential, no. Democratic capitalism is better.

  • No true Scotsman fallacy.

    I will also argue that with human nature as it is, building socialism without totalitarianism is not possible. Or without mind control.

    The fact is that totalitarian socialism is the only one that was possible to realize.

  • Well EU is not far behind. But yes, if you damage country by attacking it and literally erasing towns in it, and capturing territory (the one you guaranteed to preserve and even defend by previous agreements), expect to pay.

  • Despite all evidence of what?

  • A ban on slavery is an attack on freedom of slave owners.

  • Yes, somehow quantum mechanics is more clear. Maybe because it is usually studied after thermodynamics?

  • Under representative democracy, policies are not defined by voting. Representatives are voted in, to make the decision. They supposed to make decisions based on facts (including scientific facts) and interests of the constituents. In order to do that, institutions are created, such is bureaucracy, executive branch, committees, etc., those will employ scientists as needed. But a policy can not be made just by scientists. Climatologists can not make policy about climate change, for example, because those should rely on many aspects, including economics, security, international relationships and even internal politics (different states have different needs).