Mitch McConell says the quiet part out loud.

Exact full quote from CNN:

“People think, increasingly it appears, that we shouldn’t be doing this. Well, let me start by saying we haven’t lost a single American in this war,” McConnell said. “Most of the money that we spend related to Ukraine is actually spent in the US, replenishing weapons, more modern weapons. So it’s actually employing people here and improving our own military for what may lie ahead.”

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/4085063

  • kmkz_ninja@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    And tankies love it when America invades another country because that country didn’t democracy correctly.

    • queermunist she/her
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I don’t support Russia invading, just so we’re clear. I can just see the rational progression of events from A to Z

      Why do you think Russia invaded? Cuz Russia bad? lol

      Ukraine is literally on Russia’s boarder, and Russia is not even a regional empire - it’s a jumped up gas station. Russia is vulnerable and knows it, so it lashes out like any animal backed into a corner. Now we have another forever war, this time in Europe.

      • kbotc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t support Russia invading, just so we’re clear.

        Then why are you using Russia’s talking points?

        • queermunist she/her
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Do you agree there is a difference between “reasons” and “justifications”?

          I think Russia’s reasons for invading are real and must acknowledged to end the war. I don’t think those reasons justify the war.

          Get it?

          • kbotc@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            “I think the US’s reasons for invading Iraq are real and must be acknowledged to end the war.”

            Does that clarify what I’m talking about to you at all?

            • queermunist she/her
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              The US’s reasons for invading Iraq weren’t fucking real. They made it all up!

              Does that clarify what I’m talking about to you at all?

              • kbotc@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yes, and that’s exactly the point I was making about Russia’s reasons. The NATO already had troops in all of the Baltics following the invasion of Crimea. (Look up Operation Atlantic Resolve) Every single US troop there was already closer to Moscow than any potential Ukrainian base could ever possibly hope to be.

                • queermunist she/her
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  You’re skipping some parts of the history. Before Operation Atlantic Resolve, there was the illegal removal of the previous anti-NATO president and the installation of a pro-NATO president, and that was the trigger for the invasion of Crimea and the illegal referendum to annex the territory in the first place. If you care to look, there’s a pretty clear through-line of tit-for-tat that keeps happening.

                  • kbotc@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    You keep skipping parts of the history. You bring up that Viktor Yanukovych’s removal was illegal and not that the court’s removal of the 2004 amendments were, themselves, illegal. (Somehow the people who were supposed to implement the constitution were above it?) or that the president went against the Legislature’s will by denying the European Union–Ukraine Association Agreement, which again, they had a right to write and approve the treaty…

                  • FluffyPotato@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    If by illegally remove you mean he was passing laws that would have made him a defacto dictator which in turn triggered protests that he violently put down triggering massive protests causing him to flee then yes.