Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

As de-facto world police, inaction on the US' part is compliance.

Of course, it took what, 70, 80 years of US influence to weaken the European armies to the point where we're highly reliant on them for defense, deterrence, tech and material. The Crimea invasion should've been the catalyst for the massively increased spending and prioritization of the military in Europe, not the 2022 escalation. I hope for Ukraine's sake that Europe has been able to catch up and restart production of equipment and that they can supply it asap, because after Ukraine it'll be Moldavia and Georgia, which already have pro-russian separatist movements / areas. Poland has invested a ton in updating their military at least.

I hope the US doesn't have veto powers to stop article 5 from being enacted if it does come to that.




No small portion of US economic dominance is spending more on the military than he China, Russia, India, Saudi Arabia, the United Kingdom, Germany, France, South Korea, Japan, and Ukraine combined. Sending money to Ukraine wasn't out of the goodness of US hearts, it was to fight a low grade proxy war with Russia. Every dollar the US spends in the Ukraine destroys many times the amount of Russian equipment and spills no US blood. I am not endorsing these actions.


> I hope for Ukraine's sake that Europe has been able to catch up and restart production of equipment and that they can supply it asap,

They can't and they won't.

https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-weapons-shells-european-unio...

https://www.dw.com/en/germany-ukraine-military-aid-2026/a-69...

Sending more munitions to Ukraine means it takes the Russian military longer to overcome the Ukrainian army by force of arms. The unstated aspect that is often glossed over is that this requires more and more Ukrainian men to be forced against their will to die for the territorial integrity of the country (because in 2024 the Ukrainian military is fueled overwhelming by conscription, not by volunteers). It's bizarre to me that is considered a "pro-Ukrainian" take. It's like egging on Paraguay during the War of the Triple Alliance to keep fighting, no matter if ~70% of your male population dies in the process. Just don't surrender!


It's pro-ukrainian in relation to the alternative, which appears to be the eventual complete dissolution of Ukrainian sovereignty?


If Ukrainian sovereignty mattered...Ukrainian men would still be volunteering to protect it. They aren't. They have 60,000 formal criminal cases against deserters alone. Western news media is reporting that 50-70%% of conscripts get killed/wounded before their first rotation....and of the survivors half of them abandon their posts after being on the receiving end of Russian artillery. The press gangs have to raid concerts and nightclubs and drag out the patrons to keep the front line supplied with fresh meat. Dudes aren't patriotically defending Ukrainian sovereignty anymore because they know staring down Russian artillery and air strikes indefinitely is a death sentence.

Americans and Western Europeans cheer for Ukrainian sovereignty, but seem disinterested in Ukrainian lives. I think the bulk of Ukrainian men would rather trade the Blue&Yellow for the Russian tri-color, and keep their balls/legs/arms attached.

https://www.kyivpost.com/post/39622

https://www.ft.com/content/b9396112-585a-4f7e-9628-13d500c99...


trying to be de-facto world police has caused many issues for US. (Current) repubs wants to stop getting involved in other conflicts (except supporting Israel)


This sounds like "Silence is violence" garbage that is used to bully anyone who's not an activist. In this case, actively pro war.

No. We don't want to be world police. We want to make money and grow our families.


It's a little more than silence. The US is actively selling weapons to Israel, actively sanctioning Israel's biggest enemy/rival Iran (not specifically to help Israel, but still), pressuring other Israel enemies to normalize relations with them, using their Security Council veto to block any UN resolution against Israel, etc.

Israel's diplomatic position would be much weaker if they didn't believe that the US would keep supporting them no matter what they do.


> Israel's diplomatic position would be much weaker if they didn't believe that the US would keep supporting them no matter what they do.

Why do you feel that Israel's diplomatic position needs to be weaker?

And how would the Palestinians' diplomatic position be, without the support of Iran, Jordan, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Turkey, Lebanon, Libya, Tunis, and the USSR and now Russia?


My comment was in reference to Ukraine/Russia. I don't think we should be involved with Israel/Palestine either




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: