• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US prepares $1B aid package for troubled Ukraine.....

I don't either at least not yet. But like everything in this administration, instead of coming up with real solutions to any problem, the answer is throw money at it. While Kerry keeps shooting his mouth off with empty threats, investors have already punished Putin yesterday by causing Russia's stock market to plunge 10%. When you have a bunch of yahoos running foreign affairs making us look weak on the world stage and gutting our military, is it any wonder that Putin feels like he can get away with what he is doing? The despots know when it's safe to raise Hell. Even the left leaning Washington Post yesterday called Obama and his administration's foreign policy fantasy. I pray to God we are not faced with another attack on this country or that this thing with Russia escalates into a war because quite frankly those currently in charge couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag.


Mornin' Vesper.....Yeah Russian Markets plunged and so to did the EU's. Notice they weren't so eager to throw up numbers as to what aid they would give. They did throwup that they would talk about it. Bout it.


Of Course Obama.....now looks like a major fool giving this money to the Ukraine. While Kerry is in the Ukraine making a Special Guest Appearance. To bad its not like the 1960 TV shows.....where Special Guest Appearance means.....no longer part of the Show. :lol:
 
A billion dollars is useless.

Also, a billion dollars is cheap. US federal budget is basically 3000 billions. It's not even 1% of the budget.
Moreoever, it's useless to Ukraine. 1bil doesn't cover 1 months' spending with all the troubles this "mini aggression war" caused and all the damage that the previous government did. Consider this, under Yanukovych, almost 37bil euros went "missing"... well, went into the pockets of politicians and their clientele which is why Ukraine is in big trouble now, economically.

The EU plans to give a 15-20bil euros bailout to Ukraine. those are the numbers circulating. We'll know more in 2 days.



Mornin' RM.....that's not true. We don't have the money like we use. Now that's not to say we couldn't muster it up, but the Ukraine wasn't an ally and we giving money to a Line on a list that wasn't there and then is pencil in. Cannot be trusted.

Moreover.....how can Obama justify this 1 Billion dollars of aid to the Ukraine, giving money to those outside the US. When the US economy isn't improving like they say.
 
I don't either at least not yet. But like everything in this administration, instead of coming up with real solutions to any problem, the answer is throw money at it. While Kerry keeps shooting his mouth off with empty threats, investors have already punished Putin yesterday by causing Russia's stock market to plunge 10%. When you have a bunch of yahoos running foreign affairs making us look weak on the world stage and gutting our military, is it any wonder that Putin feels like he can get away with what he is doing? The despots know when it's safe to raise Hell. Even the left leaning Washington Post yesterday called Obama and his administration's foreign policy fantasy. I pray to God we are not faced with another attack on this country or that this thing with Russia escalates into a war because quite frankly those currently in charge couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag.

Masterful scam, and we're the scamee. Putin plays games very well. How much "aid" are France and Great Brittain and Germany kicking in? How far would one billion dollars go to repairing our infrastructure?
 
Mornin' RM.....that's not true. We don't have the money like we use. Now that's not to say we couldn't muster it up, but the Ukraine wasn't an ally and we giving money to a Line on a list that wasn't there and then is pencil in. Cannot be trusted.

Moreover.....how can Obama justify this 1 Billion dollars of aid to the Ukraine, giving money to those outside the US. When the US economy isn't improving like they say.

I agree. And the same logic works with all US aid right now.
 
Masterful scam, and we're the scamee. Putin plays games very well. How much "aid" are France and Great Brittain and Germany kicking in? How far would one billion dollars go to repairing our infrastructure?

That $1 billion could fund about 20 Solyndras. ;)
 
A billion dollars is useless.

Also, a billion dollars is cheap. US federal budget is basically 3000 billions. It's not even 1% of the budget.
Moreoever, it's useless to Ukraine. 1bil doesn't cover 1 months' spending with all the troubles this "mini aggression war" caused and all the damage that the previous government did. Consider this, under Yanukovych, almost 37bil euros went "missing"... well, went into the pockets of politicians and their clientele which is why Ukraine is in big trouble now, economically.

The EU plans to give a 15-20bil euros bailout to Ukraine. those are the numbers circulating. We'll know more in 2 days.

And it should be the responsibility of the EU to pony up the money. What I don't understand is where were they through all the months leading up to this point? They knew the people in Ukraine were fighting a crooked regime and just now they decide to call for an emergency meeting to consider sanctions against Russia? That should have happened months ago! Evidently Obama isn't the only leader with his head up his butt.
 
tecoyah;1062994642 That Putin seems to be "Backing Down" may very well be a result of understanding his actions will lead to great damage to his regime said:
Putin has gotten what he wants....secured his naval base and put Ukraine on notice. He has no need or even want to take the rest of the country. He took Crimea which historically has been part of Russia and has a large percentage of its population who consider themselves Russian. Do you honestly think after Europe, Britain, and Germany refused to engage him that Ukraine will consider closer ties with the west or will instead pay attention to what Russia wants? I wont even get started on the stupidity our government brought up. :D Putin could hurt us badly economicly if he carried out his threats.
 
Mornin' RM.....that's not true. We don't have the money like we use. Now that's not to say we couldn't muster it up, but the Ukraine wasn't an ally and we giving money to a Line on a list that wasn't there and then is pencil in. Cannot be trusted.

Moreover.....how can Obama justify this 1 Billion dollars of aid to the Ukraine, giving money to those outside the US. When the US economy isn't improving like they say.

Again, the USA determined the clauses in the loan, or the aid package or whatever. It can be a blank check or it can be targetted for certain payments.

Ok, I can understand the idea of not being "morally justified" to just give money to a country who wasn't an ally. Ok, I can get that... I'm not saying the loan should happen or that it shouldn't. I'm just saying that there are a lot of rather hostile countries to the USA who have been receiving money from the USA to show friendship or to be "nice" to other countries.

1bil $ is pennies. It is much, to you and me, but to the govt... not really.

Who actually gets the money? The banks, the government? The people probably won't see a dime! .

Whoever you say gets the money and to use to whatever you say they should use. most likely -> pay loans on debts and for public spending. You don't just "give the money" as a blank check and forget about it. At least I hope not. I know that the EU, if the bailout goes through, will be supervised, as all EU loans are.
 
Putin has gotten what he wants....secured his naval base and put Ukraine on notice. He has no need or even want to take the rest of the country. He took Crimea which historically has been part of Russia and has a large percentage of its population who consider themselves Russian. Do you honestly think after Europe, Britain, and Germany refused to engage him that Ukraine will consider closer ties with the west or will instead pay attention to what Russia wants? I wont even get started on the stupidity our government brought up. :D Putin could hurt us badly economicly if he carried out his threats.

And he has done nothing wrong in the meantime, and far less than the US has done, despite the criticisms.
 
That billion dollars would be better spent here. Why do we got to prop up all these countries around the world? If we were down, they would kick us in the teeth.
 
Again, the USA determined the clauses in the loan, or the aid package or whatever. It can be a blank check or it can be targetted for certain payments.

Ok, I can understand the idea of not being "morally justified" to just give money to a country who wasn't an ally. Ok, I can get that... I'm not saying the loan should happen or that it shouldn't. I'm just saying that there are a lot of rather hostile countries to the USA who have been receiving money from the USA to show friendship or to be "nice" to other countries.

1bil $ is pennies. It is much, to you and me, but to the govt... not really.



Whoever you say gets the money and to use to whatever you say they should use. most likely -> pay loans on debts and for public spending. You don't just "give the money" as a blank check and forget about it. At least I hope not. I know that the EU, if the bailout goes through, will be supervised, as all EU loans are.

Soros is on record saying Germany will leave the EU by September. How does that figure in, and who's left to pay anything back?
 
And it should be the responsibility of the EU to pony up the money. What I don't understand is where were they through all the months leading up to this point? They knew the people in Ukraine were fighting a crooked regime and just now they decide to call for an emergency meeting to consider sanctions against Russia? That should have happened months ago! Evidently Obama isn't the only leader with his head up his butt.

The EU is pony-ing up the money. The latest talks and speculations revealed an aid package from the EU of about 15bil euros but it can get bigger... or smaller. But for now, the

The EU was pretty active, vocally, from the beginning, from after Vilnius when Yanukovych refused to sign the treaty... there are tons of news about it, you just didn't read them. The US just hopped in this discussion in the past week since Russia got involved, the EU has been in this for almost 4 months, condemning Yanukovych, telling Russia to not interfere with the protests, condemning the violence... for crying out loud. Look at the news.

Yes, we don't have the brightest bulbs over here either, but we've been in this from the get-go.
 
Soros is on record saying Germany will leave the EU by September. How does that figure in, and who's left to pay anything back?

Why do you care what Soros has to say? And why should I?
 
The EU is pony-ing up the money. The latest talks and speculations revealed an aid package from the EU of about 15bil euros but it can get bigger... or smaller. But for now, the

The EU was pretty active, vocally, from the beginning, from after Vilnius when Yanukovych refused to sign the treaty... there are tons of news about it, you just didn't read them. The US just hopped in this discussion in the past week since Russia got involved, the EU has been in this for almost 4 months, condemning Yanukovych, telling Russia to not interfere with the protests, condemning the violence... for crying out loud. Look at the news.

Yes, we don't have the brightest bulbs over here either, but we've been in this from the get-go.

I do read the news. And yes there was a lot of TALK and show of disgust coming from the EU governments but talk is cheap. There is a big difference between condemning something and actually taking action against it.
 
I do read the news. And yes there was a lot of TALK and show of disgust coming from the EU governments but talk is cheap. There is a big difference between condemning something and actually taking action against it.

U mean like this?
EU tells Russia to withdraw troops or face possible sanctions | Reuters
Or this:
EUobserver / Ukraine crisis: EU threatens asset freeze on Russian officials
Ukraine crisis: EU threatens asset freeze on Russian officials

In 2 days time there is a EU meeting to determine the sanctions but for now the threats are real... though it may seem that the UK will ***** out. Anyway... it's not like they want to be part of the EU to begin with.

Talk may be cheap, but it's better than war. The US has only done talk too. Everyone talks so that guns don't start firing. Talk is good.
 
Can't we just leave Kerry there for a few weeks and save the billion $? I don't get the need to throw money at Ukraine at this time.

This is a good idea. Tell them Kerry won't leave until they come to some peaceful conclusion. Of course, we Americans are against cruel and unusual punishment.
 
The $1 Billion in aid is symbolic. That's it. It will do almost nothing to actually stabilize Ukraine's economy or anything else. This is a European problem to be handled by European powers. The U.S. should not be in the middle of this. There is nothing we can or should do militarily. And we should not engage even in serious saber rattling. Sending CAG's and subs near that region does nothing for anyone because we aren't going to use them nor should we. It makes us look like blowhards. Putin knows this, everyone knows this. Russia has a national security stake in the Crimea, we do not. They have had a military presence on the peninsula since Catherine the Great. Nothing Russia has done in the Crimea changes our national security situation. It seems that many (if not most) Crimean citizens do not want to be a part of Ukraine and are more closely aligned with Russia anyway. My point is that there is no need for U.S. involvement there, it isn't wanted and it is warranted.

Ukraine is incredibly important to Russia in terms of their energy export business because of the pipeline network. It's not surprising that they are going to send strong signals to Kiev to cease their move towards the EU and abandon any idea that they have about joining NATO. The U.S. has flexed it's muscle for decades to influence economic situations. The EU is very slow to engage in economic sanctions because they need Russian energy trade. NATO isn't economically or militarily ready to take on Russia (although in a conventional war they would do quite well against the Red Army). But they don't even want to consider that. Why? The Crimea isn't worth it. Not to anyone but Russia. Trade sanctions by the U.S. would be toothless and accomplish little to nothing realistically. I don't blame the EU for not wanting to engage so aggressively.

This isn't the 1930's. This isn't the 1950's or 60's. Russia isn't rolling westward towards Paris. They aren't engaging in ethnic cleansing. And they aren't bombing and destroying Ukrainian infrastructure or killing anyone. They have put about 15-20.000 troops on the peninsula (which by the way they can have up to 25,000 based upon their treaty with Ukraine). You have Ukrainian troops switching sides, civilians in the streets supporting Russian troops on the ground It's just not quite living up to the fear mongering and "oh no WW3 is here Russia is evil" rhetoric. The U.S. has done for more shocking things for far less justification and we do all kinds of acrobatics in order to make it look legitimate. Certainly what Moscow did was provocative, it was wrong, and it was against the treaty they signed regarding the Ukraine sovereignty. But...it doesn't actually amount to "destabilizing" Europe as the U.S. media seems to keep regurgitating.

Let them sort it out. Any U.S. intervention would do nothing but inflame and prolong the situation. And that has nothing to do with Obama. We simply aren't needed there. EU forces aren't shooting Russians over this, Ukrainian forces aren't shooting Russians over this. Why would we even be considering this (meaning hawks in D.C. who are clamoring that we need to flex our military and not look so weak)?
 
Last edited:
Why do you care what Soros has to say? And why should I?

Because he is one of those "one-world governmenters" behind the curtain working to bring us down to the level of the poorer countries in the world. Bankruptcy will do that. When Russia and China and other large countries are working to replace the dollar as the world's reserve currency, we are the ONLY ones hurt. Call me nuts, but that is what I think.
 
This is a good idea. Tell them Kerry won't leave until they come to some peaceful conclusion. Of course, we Americans are against cruel and unusual punishment.

:lamo: We might be willing to make an exception in this case..

Well, I'm off to work. Have to make enough to help the Ukraine too. Have a good day.
 
I must admit that I have not read all of the posts in this thread, but I have to ask. Chances are good that Putin will control the Ukraine when this is over. Whether or not it will lead to bloodshed is yet to be seen. IF he does take control of this region and I believe he will, what happens to that billion we just loaned the Ukraine? Are we willing to just write it off? I don't want to sound as if the money is all that matters, but we could really use that money here and I am not sure we have it to spare.
 
I must admit that I have not read all of the posts in this thread, but I have to ask. Chances are good that Putin will control the Ukraine when this is over. Whether or not it will lead to bloodshed is yet to be seen. IF he does take control of this region and I believe he will, what happens to that billion we just loaned the Ukraine? Are we willing to just write it off? I don't want to sound as if the money is all that matters, but we could really use that money here and I am not sure we have it to spare.


Thats ridiculous. Putin will quite possibly take a little chunk of the Ukraine, Crimea, and turn it into a reliable Russian puppet, which it kinda is already, really.

But he's almost certainly lost an entire nation on his own border that will now be more than willing to ally even closer with the West. Ukraine has a pretty strong desire to be independent, and was leaning toward the West. Now it will be fleeing toward the west.


Its paradoxical, but Putin is showing profound weakness with this show of force, and will lose much, much more than he's gained.. which is pretty minimal.

Heres a nice analysis:

How Putin's Ukraine Invasion Is a Disaster for Russia | TIME.com
 
The $1 Billion in aid is symbolic. That's it. It will do almost nothing to actually stabilize Ukraine's economy or anything else. This is a European problem to be handled by European powers. The U.S. should not be in the middle of this. There is nothing we can or should do militarily. And we should not engage even in serious saber rattling. Sending CAG's and subs near that region does nothing for anyone because we aren't going to use them nor should we. It makes us look like blowhards. Putin knows this, everyone knows this. Russia has a national security stake in the Crimea, we do not. They have had a military presence on the peninsula since Catherine the Great. Nothing Russia has done in the Crimea changes our national security situation. It seems that many (if not most) Crimean citizens do not want to be a part of Ukraine and are more closely aligned with Russia anyway. My point is that there is no need for U.S. involvement there, it isn't wanted and it is warranted.

Ukraine is incredibly important to Russia in terms of their energy export business because of the pipeline network. It's not surprising that they are going to send strong signals to Kiev to cease their move towards the EU and abandon any idea that they have about joining NATO. The U.S. has flexed it's muscle for decades to influence economic situations. The EU is very slow to engage in economic sanctions because they need Russian energy trade. NATO isn't economically or militarily ready to take on Russia (although in a conventional war they would do quite well against the Red Army). But they don't even want to consider that. Why? The Crimea isn't worth it. Not to anyone but Russia. Trade sanctions by the U.S. would be toothless and accomplish little to nothing realistically. I don't blame the EU for not wanting to engage so aggressively.

This isn't the 1930's. This isn't the 1950's or 60's. Russia isn't rolling westward towards Paris. They aren't engaging in ethnic cleansing. And they aren't bombing and destroying Ukrainian infrastructure or killing anyone. They have put about 15-20.000 troops on the peninsula (which by the way they can have up to 25,000 based upon their treaty with Ukraine). You have Ukrainian troops switching sides, civilians in the streets supporting Russian troops on the ground It's just not quite living up to the fear mongering and "oh no WW3 is here Russia is evil" rhetoric. The U.S. has done for more shocking things for far less justification and we do all kinds of acrobatics in order to make it look legitimate. Certainly what Moscow did was provocative, it was wrong, and it was against the treaty they signed regarding the Ukraine sovereignty. But...it doesn't actually amount to "destabilizing" Europe as the U.S. media seems to keep regurgitating.

Let them sort it out. Any U.S. intervention would do nothing but inflame and prolong the situation. And that has nothing to do with Obama. We simply aren't needed there. EU forces aren't shooting Russians over this, Ukrainian forces aren't shooting Russians over this. Why would we even be considering this (meaning hawks in D.C. who are clamoring that we need to flex our military and not look so weak)?


Mornin Lerxst. :2wave: Indeed.....an excellent post.
reputation_silverstar.gif



images-15.jpeg
 
U mean like this?
EU tells Russia to withdraw troops or face possible sanctions | Reuters
Or this:
EUobserver / Ukraine crisis: EU threatens asset freeze on Russian officials


In 2 days time there is a EU meeting to determine the sanctions but for now the threats are real... though it may seem that the UK will ***** out. Anyway... it's not like they want to be part of the EU to begin with.

Talk may be cheap, but it's better than war. The US has only done talk too. Everyone talks so that guns don't start firing. Talk is good.

Yes they moved into action two days ago. Big whoop. They should have been warning/sanction Putin clear back in November when the big protests started in the Ukraine. Everyone knew that Viktor Yanukovych was a Putin puppet. He was known as Russia's man. His 2004 election was a fraud. But then he seemed to be earnestly seeking the agreement with the EU which angered Putin. And when Yanukovych backed down from the EU agreement it was obvious his decision was being "influenced" by Putin who is still angry over losing the Ukraine in the 90's. The EU could have done more sooner rather than later. They, just like Obama, show their weakness and gives despots like Putin the green light. Things like sanctions do not equate to gunfire.
There was a little blurp in the news yesterday that Yanukovych who fled to Russia is dead of a heart attack according to reporting in the Ukraine papers. Hmmmm, the first thought I had when reading that one is Russia has a history of ending the lives of once useful idiots who become useless. Just a thought.....
Yanukovych is Dead? | Armstrong Economics
 
Heres a very good post I read on Andrew Sulllivans blog, discussing how the neo cons like McCain want to rattle sabers and consider military intervention, but they dont recognize the profound damage that Putin is doing to himself and to Russia by putting on this display.

Really excellent read.

You and I were watching McCain at the same time and thinking essentially the same thing. McCain, Graham, Bolton and others of that ilk, watch the events in Ukraine and are filled with Putin-envy. Vladimir Putin is a master of the game, they seem to think. Look at his almost effortless projection of force, his willingness to dispatch troops and threaten war with so little hesitation or circumspection. They love it! If only we had our own Putin at the helm!

But how pathetic and short-sighted is this vision? In fact, Putin is stirred to move because he feels humiliated. His puppet was ousted from power by a popular uprising. His plans to seal Ukraine to Russia for another generation are evaporating. His hold on a plausible plurality of the Ukrainian people was shattered. The fuel deals are clearly seen as a crude power-play by most Ukrainians. Even the Russian-speaking Ukrainians of the eastern and southern provinces are slipping out of Moscow’s grasp. There, when we look more deeply into the demographics, we see that even if the 50+ers feel nostalgia for Moscow and support for the Kremlin, the generation of 35-down increasingly sees more promise from an alignment with Europe. The pro-Russian regions of Ukraine will predictably cease to be pro-Russian within a generation.

Putin, the crass intelligence officer, turns quickly to brute force. But what is the cost to him of this step? Not only in Ukraine, but in all the other states of the “near abroad,” the fear of Russia is moved up several notches, the image of Russia as a reptilian predator rises. Even within Russia, most citizens understand the shrill propaganda of ORT (the Russian state TV) for what it is and consider war with Ukraine to be irresponsible nonsense. Putin’s credibility as a leader fades. Increasingly he appears to be someone motivated by fear of loss and failure, not by greatness.

The Putin who shows his face to the world today is not some dynamic new Napoleon delivering a new master stroke. He is a tired, failed leader, who is steadily losing the confidence of his own people, who is seen as hopelessly corrupt, and who is being deserted by Russian elites and detested by the youth in particular. Putin is a spent force. He may hang on for another year or another decade, but in Russia the demand for a new leader will grow steadily from this point.

The McCains, Grahams and Boltons don’t understand this dynamic, and that’s frankly because they are too much like Putin. The worst imaginable thing would be for the leaders of the West to think and behave like Putin.

That would lay the ground for a cold war or even a major new land war in Europe – at a time when this is utterly unnecessary. There are powerful historical forces at play that will achieve what needs to be achieved. Putin is on the wrong side of them. His position is hopeless.

The events unfolding in Ukraine, in Crimea and Moscow are very significant, and perhaps the weightiest developments since the collapse of the Berlin Wall. On the other hand, what we see transpiring in Washington, among its pundits and papers like WaPo and WSJ, fully exposes the bankruptcy of the American chattering classes, and particularly of the world inside the Beltway. They are beholden to a great military machine which seeks conflict where it can find it, and their appreciation of the forces driving the world are laughably simplistic. At this point I thank god for Barack Obama, and even more, for Angela Merkel and other European leaders who have drawn the reasonable lessons of America’s Iraq debacle – even as Americans seem unwilling to think about it.
 
Thats ridiculous. Putin will quite possibly take a little chunk of the Ukraine, Crimea, and turn it into a reliable Russian puppet, which it kinda is already, really.

But he's almost certainly lost an entire nation on his own border that will now be more than willing to ally even closer with the West. Ukraine has a pretty strong desire to be independent, and was leaning toward the West. Now it will be fleeing toward the west.


Its paradoxical, but Putin is showing profound weakness with this show of force, and will lose much, much more than he's gained.. which is pretty minimal.

Heres a nice analysis:

How Putin's Ukraine Invasion Is a Disaster for Russia | TIME.com

I read the piece and have to say that I am surprised to hear how high the numbers are that reject this action. Although early, the amount of protest is somewhat small which makes me think they are waiting to see what happens next. I can get behind that. My question is even if this escalates and Putin moves forward with a full scale invasion, what do the protesters plan to accomplish? The article eludes to a revolt against Putin. I have a hard time believing that would work out, but again I don't pretend to know the inner workings of Russia or it's people.

I am a little behind in this conflict so be patient while I try to get up to speed. At this point all I know is this is affecting energy rates and I am trying to get a grasp on how it will effect my clients long term.
 
Back
Top Bottom