Russian Ukraine shenanigans

[Stoker]

On 6/3/2024 at 8:59 PM, Smokin said:

This.  We cannot tax our way out of this mess.  Our current debt is approaching $267,000 per taxpayer.  Or about 30% more than last year's GDP.  You'd have to have a 100% federal tax rate on absolutely everything, not just those who currently pay taxes, for an entire year and we still would be in debt.  To say it another way, the entire US population would have to give all their income for an entire year to the Feds.  And state, county, and local governments would have to also work for free for the year.  And that would still only pay off 69% of our debt.

Debt and deficit are two different things. Closing the gap on the deficit will eliminate the debt in the long run.

You can eliminate the deficit by taxing the entire US population roughly 5% of their income. Honestly, it might be a great compromise agreement - pass a constitutional amendment that if the budget is in deficit, we hit everyone with a 5% surtax. That would rile the hell out of huge chunks of the population (as I clearly have done here), which means Congress would have real incentives to reduce spending to avoid it.

Just sitting around angry at spending and hoping government will magically reduce itself in size isn't productive thinking, though. 

[Smokin]

I get what you're saying and in general agree, but closing the gap won't eliminate the debt.  We have a deficit and debt problem.  Killing the deficit would decrease the debt growth to only interest, which would be a significant victory in these absurd times.  But I don't think a 5% surtax that is only applied to the debt would even cover the interest at this point.  The interest alone was pushing 1 trillion last year.  If we balanced the budget and found an extra trillion in the seat cushions, that would only stop the debt from growing, wouldn't pay off a penny.  We'd still owe $267K per taxpayer.

[BashiChuni]

1 hour ago, Stoker said:

 

You can eliminate the deficit by taxing the entire US population roughly 5% of their income. Honestly, it might be a great compromise agreement - pass a constitutional amendment that if the budget is in deficit, we hit everyone with a 5% surtax. That would rile the hell out of huge chunks of the population (as I clearly have done here), which means Congress would have real incentives to reduce spending to avoid it.

 

not a bad idea for compromise. there'd have to be fucking ZERO loopholes on that. maybe people under the poverty level are exempt. but everyone else smashed with 5% flat.

the problem is the government's nature is to spend money. the only fix to that is smaller government.

first thing i'd do if i were king is slap the DoD with a 20% budget reduction across the board. suddenly ukraine won't seem so important.

[BashiChuni]

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/30/biden-ukraine-weapons-strike-russia-00160731

 

It’s a stunning shift the administration initially said would escalate the war by more directly involving the U.S. in the fight. But worsening conditions for Ukraine on the battlefield –– namely Russia’s advances and improved position in Kharkiv –– led the president to change his mind.

[Swizzle]

1 hour ago, BashiChuni said:

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/30/biden-ukraine-weapons-strike-russia-00160731

 

It’s a stunning shift the administration initially said would escalate the war by more directly involving the U.S. in the fight. But worsening conditions for Ukraine on the battlefield –– namely Russia’s advances and improved position in Kharkiv –– led the president to change his mind.

Got a friend who always says, "Rules matter till they don't."  He's always been right save two exceptions - death and taxes. Haven't seen their exceptions, have seen their deductions!

[Swizzle]

Speaking of absolutes and their lingering hauntings

[BashiChuni]

33 minutes ago, Swizzle said:

Got a friend who always says, "Rules matter till they don't."  He's always been right save two exceptions - death and taxes. Haven't seen their exceptions, have seen their deductions!

yeah but your cuck friend wasn't escalating a conflict against a nuclear armed nation.

[Lord Ratner]

6 hours ago, BashiChuni said:

yeah but your cuck friend wasn't escalating a conflict against a nuclear armed nation.

I have yet to meet someone who uses the term "cuck" as a pejorative who can reliably make a woman cum. 

 

Your internet troll persona is weak and frightened, but now you're venturing into the 14-year-old with an internet connection territory. Relax a little.

[Swizzle]

6 hours ago, BashiChuni said:

yeah but your cuck friend wasn't escalating a conflict against a nuclear armed nation.

Yeesh, got issues? Why the personnal attack on him?

Cannot you not see the saying's wisdom that rules, this case political boundaries, are nearly ever absolute and context matters? Situations change and decisions adjust, boundaries adjust, and 'rules' revised. Even in matters of great importance like potentially escalatory actions against a nuclear superpower which seem make you blindy lash out against strangers. So, why this wild animalistic behavior? Scared of assertiveness? Like Providing weapons without restrictions because the situation changed. 

[tac airlifter]

https://www.rand.org/pubs/commentary/2024/06/us-escalation-in-ukraine-needs-a-plan.html?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

Good (and short) opinion piece analyzing US strategy in UKR given recent increased authorities allowing US weaponry used against deep targets within RUS.  
 

TLDR: Reactive, escalatory towards an ill-defined objective and overall immature.  It speaks to my primary issue with our involvement there, namely that our pol/mil leadership is simply too retarded to win & our dumb meddling will make things worse for UKR and us.  

 

[BashiChuni]

the only 14 year old behavior here are you two bozos wanting to escalate into a war where we do not belong, cannot win, and one which has potentially devastating nuclear consequences.

[Boomer6]

You guys are missing out.

[Clayton Bigsby]

Yeah quit quoting PravdaTASSi, don’t need to see the noise. 

[BashiChuni]

More platitudes. 
 

serious question for you war hawks… what does victory look like in Ukraine? Can you achieve it? Will you commit the US to do it?

because right now we have no strategic end state and are walking down another Vietnam/afghanistan. 

[GrndPndr]

14 minutes ago, BashiChuni said:

More platitudes. 
<SNIP>

because right now we have no strategic end state and are walking down another Vietnam/afghanistan. 

 

Sorry, I don't see either boots on the ground or air assets employed downrange there, what are we walking down exactly?

[BashiChuni]

1 hour ago, GrndPndr said:

Sorry, I don't see either boots on the ground or air assets employed downrange there, what are we walking down exactly?

what does victory look like?

[brabus]

2 hours ago, GrndPndr said:

Sorry, I don't see either boots on the ground or air assets employed downrange there, what are we walking down exactly?

I’m not commenting either direction, but we’re basically at Vietnam-like in the late 50s/early 60s “before” the war. I’m sure many people had similar thoughts during that time period too. Past performance is not a guarantee of future performance and all that, but the comparison to that specific time period of SEA is not invalid

[ViperMan]

7 hours ago, BashiChuni said:

More platitudes. 
 

serious question for you war hawks… what does victory look like in Ukraine? Can you achieve it? Will you commit the US to do it?

because right now we have no strategic end state and are walking down another Vietnam/afghanistan. 

I read that as more directed at Trump, not Ukraine. I could be wrong though.

[HeloDude]

1 hour ago, ViperMan said:

I read that as more directed at Trump, not Ukraine. I could be wrong though.

This is coming from the same administration that said we stand by Israel and her right to defend herself against Hamas…but then said there was a red line or whatever to what Israel could do.  Yeah—it’s politics all the time with this administration.  Not saying it would be much different with Trump or others, but this current one especially.

[Boomer6]

12 hours ago, HeloDude said:

This is coming from the same administration that said we stand by Israel and her right to defend herself against Hamas…but then said there was a red line or whatever to what Israel could do.  Yeah—it’s politics all the time with this administration.  Not saying it would be much different with Trump or others, but this current one especially.

I don't think any current US administration would openly condone mass genocide, chemical weapons use, etc., so obviously there is always going to be a red line regardless of party. The fact that they changed their tune somewhat when large numbers of protesters, that are made up of their voting base, started getting media attention is not surprising..for either party.

[FourFans]

On 6/6/2024 at 2:50 PM, BashiChuni said:

what does victory look like?

It's very difficult to explain victory to someone who's never experienced it. 

Maybe just sit down and watch for a while.

Edited June 11, 2024 by FourFans

[HeloDude]

2 hours ago, FourFans said:

It's very difficult to explain victory to someone who's never experienced it. 

Maybe just sit down and watch for a while.

Why don’t you try explaining it in your own words/opinions anyway?  If you want to/can.

In other news, Zelensky is now plan ing on releasing prisoners to fight in its war.

[gearhog]

A US-Ukraine NGO is compiling and publishing a list of Americans who oppose Ukraine aid.

Jim Banks is sending letters to all the people on the list.

Here is the NGO's list of people who need to be dealt with.

 

[FourFans]

19 hours ago, HeloDude said:

Why don’t you try explaining it in your own words/opinions anyway?  If you want to/can.

In other news, Zelensky is now plan ing on releasing prisoners to fight in its war.

If it's an opinion you'll have, that's easy.  Victory is the end of hostilities and whatever the Ukrainian people are willing to define as victory, short of invasion of Russia.  I would guess they'd want full restoration of territory and return of hostages.  That's what I'd expect if someone invaded the US, why should they demand anything less?  More to the point: It should be their call.  Heaven knows they're earning it right now.  It's irrational that the US gets involved in redrawing everyone else's map over there. 

I also belief in keeping promises.  Does Ukraine really matter to us?  No.  Does the power of the US promise on the international stage matter?  Yes.  THAT'S why we should be helping: Because we said we would.

[Standby]

59 minutes ago, FourFans said:

Victory is the end of hostilities and whatever the Ukrainian people are willing to define as victory, short of invasion of Russia.  I would guess they'd want full restoration of territory and return of hostages. 

This is why “we” have not experienced true victory in a longggg time. Unrealistic goals.