Biden allows Ukraine to strike inside Russia with long-range missiles
Posted by wkwork@reddit | Libertarian | View on Reddit | 55 comments
The cold war is back on, boys! Lock in those Haliburton stocks while you can!
neutrumocorum@reddit
Good.
Timirninja@reddit
Do you know that targeting data, satellite data and actual launches operations conducted solely by Americans?
neutrumocorum@reddit
It's good to know it's being done right.
Timirninja@reddit
Yes, the main goal is to finish the job!
☢️
neutrumocorum@reddit
In all seriousness, I'm not really concerned with Putin's saber-rattling. He postured the exact same way before and during the invasion in 2014.
It doesn't sit right with me at all that the U.S. along with the entire western world, pressured Ukraine to give up their nukes with the explicit promise that they wouldn't need them because we would defend them, only to allow them to be subjigated 60 years later.
Ukraine did right for the world. It's our turn to do right for them. For the sake of freedom and sovereignty, we should not abandon them to an aggressive expansionary state.
Timirninja@reddit
I disagree of your portrayal of the events. Nukes they had never been theirs, they were belong to Soviet national security state. Sort of like federal property in one given state, and after the dissolution of Soviet Union, it was collected and stored in Russia, and Ukraine never had the “codes” to launch them anyways. Nevertheless Budapest memorandum of you actually read the bulletpoints states, that among territorial sovereignty the U.S. and Russia promise to keep Ukraine’s political sovereignty or independence, meaning no regime change. Soft coup in Ukraine was done many times, but violent change of political power occurred just few weeks before Russia occupied Crimea. The rest you already know
TexasBrett@reddit
Isn’t this the ultimate libertarian view? Missile manufacturers should be able to sell to Ukraine and Ukraine gets to decide how to use the missiles as they see fit.
triple_stitch@reddit
They should also be able to sell to Russia.
Anen-o-me@reddit
A libertarian society would not sell to an aggressor nation who invaded their neighbor and would refuse to sell to anyone who tried also.
triple_stitch@reddit
A libertarian society would not tell private companies who they can or can't sell to.
Anen-o-me@reddit
They're not. Warrant provisions are a private form of enforcing mass refusal to sell to for bad actors.
triple_stitch@reddit
Yeah, trust me that without the government as it is today nobody would think "Russia bad". "Russia is a bad actor" comes from a government-centric world where you identify Russian companies with the Russian state. Btw the USA government is as bad as the Russia one concerning wars.
Anen-o-me@reddit
Wrong, from the viewpoint of libertarian ethics, invasion of another country is one of the worst things you can do.
nocommentacct@reddit
Would an ancap society? If so at what point in the process of the libertarian govt does that get nixxed?
Anen-o-me@reddit
It can be done entirely with private contract.
TexasBrett@reddit
Doubt Russia would be interested in undercutting their own missile manufacturing.
gumby_twain@reddit
No, national defense is still a function of government in most libertarian models, and stuff like ITAR and EAR can/should fundamental parts of any serious national defense strategy.
TexasBrett@reddit
Right, national defense. Selling missiles to Ukraine doesn’t directly have anything to do with national defense.
DoctorDirtnasty@reddit
TheHuskerdoo@reddit
The Ukrainians aren't buying the weapons. These are US gifts.
divinecomedian3@reddit
Sure, if the manufacturers didn't work hand-in-hand with the US government
TexasBrett@reddit
How is that libertarian? Are you telling missile manufacturers can’t work with their biggest customer to deliver a product they want?
wkwork@reddit (OP)
Their biggest customer is stealing money every day from all of us at a mine boggling rate.
reeder1987@reddit
Well I heard it’s Elon musks fault that we ran a 1.7T deficit last year. He didn’t pay enough taxes.
Daves_not_here_mannn@reddit
For me….the libertarian part stops when the US is paying for the missiles sent to Ukraine.
thelegend13x@reddit
Taxpayer money going into flames 🔥🔥🔥
wkwork@reddit (OP)
Pointlessly, yep. In a few months Trump and Putin will be toasting to the new border line.
YetAnotherCommenter@reddit
I'm sorry but as a libertarian, I find it hard to NOT support doing this.
Russia already escalated by bringing North Korean soldiers into the conflict. North Korea is a third-party nuclear-armed state that clearly has no interest in this conflict but was brought in anyway by Russia. Allowing Ukraine to use US missiles to attack targets inside Russian territory is a fair response to that.
In addition, doing so increases Ukraine's potency on the field, which in turn increases Ukraine's negotiating position when Trump forces Zelensky and Putin to hammer out a deal for a ceasefire.
I hate the military-industrial complex too, I know they're the biggest Special Interest Group in the US, and I think the CIA are the ultimate rogue bureaucracy, and I want the war between Ukraine and Russia to end as quickly as possible (and I think trading land for peace is inevitable at this point). But Putin was not morally justified in invading Ukraine, and he still thinks Russia is entitled to a defensive barrier of client states to separate them from the rest of Europe (he isn't, and no state is). And seriously, if he thinks anyone in Western or Central Europe wants to invade Russia, he is delusional.
im_intj@reddit
Only makes sense of you are a libertarian in Ukraine. My tax money shouldn't be go to funding some never ending war where the main selling point is that if Russia is not stopped it will result in the invasion of all of Europe. Get serious with all this propaganda.
Pleasant_Start9544@reddit
No money should be used for any foreign country. Just my $0.02.
gumby_twain@reddit
Just some sabre rattling by the outgoing admin. It won’t make a lick of difference, and in about 3 months the new borders of Ukraine will be drawn, just like Crimea 8 years ago.
Careless_Emergency66@reddit
Lots of libertarians in Russia or no?
salparadise5000@reddit
Biden didn't allow anything, he was too busy taking a nap. Possibly one of his minions.
alectictac@reddit
They already had them. This is just allowing them to strike in Russia. Which is a good thing, Russia been using Iranian and North Korean munitions to hit all over Ukraine. Even the odds
reeder1987@reddit
Going to be like Afghanistan. Billions of dollars worth of US weaponry left to the hands of the Russians.
alectictac@reddit
Well they are using most of it, its old weaponry, and most are destroying Russian soldiers.
AngelKing74@reddit
Bidens last fuck you as he leaves office. Also, I’m sure he made a commitment to some military contractors to kick this thing off before he goes.
DRpatato@reddit
By you're sure, you mean there's evidence? Or is this opinion just speculation based on vibes?
AngelKing74@reddit
Speculation. If there was solid proof I don’t think you’d hear about from some guy on Reddit. With the threat of nuclear retaliation, what do you suppose is the real reason for escalation?
DRpatato@reddit
"Unnamed US officials have told the New York Times and the Washington Post that Biden's approval of Ukraine's use of the ATACMS came in response to Russia's decision to allow North Korean soldiers to fight in Ukraine." --The article posted.
This reasoning makes perfect sense to me. Inviting another country into the war was a massive escalation on Russia's part. Russia makes threats with nukes a lot, I'm not shook. Putin isn't an idiot, he knowns what happens if he crosses that line. Appeasement is more dangerous, in my opinion.
reeder1987@reddit
Russia using troops from another country that have never seen combat as cannon fodder is escalating? Just asking it doesn’t seem too dramatic of a change.
One thing I think is odd is that there’s a press release on using US munitions to attack Russia. Why even announce it to the world? just get after it.
DRpatato@reddit
Inviting a country into an existing conflict is a big deal, especially an invasion with the goal of annexing land. North Korea really doesn't have any business there, and the last time an Asian country has been this involved in a war in Europe was WW2. Its a big deal to NATO especially, because we've agreed not to deploy troops of our own.
As for the press release, I imagine it was for diplomacy. Gives Russia a fair warning about our approval, so it doesn't turn into a "USA lied" situation. They want to make a big deal out of this, while not adding troops themselves. I'm not sure though, just guessing.
AngelKing74@reddit
That seems like a good excuse. I don’t see how that is escalation when Ukraine has had nato fighting along its side? Whats good for the goose is good for the gander no?
jrherita@reddit
Escalation. Wtf..
gumby_twain@reddit
Nah, it’s just sabre rattling by the outgoing admin. It won’t make a lick of difference, and in about 3 months the new borders of Ukraine will be drawn, just like Crimea 8 years ago.
WagonBurning@reddit
So much for a peaceful transition of power
DRpatato@reddit
You know that phrase means our leaders peacefully handing the reigns over to the next guy, right?
WagonBurning@reddit
Yes, I am aware. it should be true for both, should it not? Multi administration wars sounds like a bad idea.
DRpatato@reddit
I mean, the US isn't at war technically, this war likely wasn't gonna be settled by January either way, we have numerous examples in our history of wars that stretched past administrations, and that isn't even what the phrase means. I understand your sentiment, but there are better ways to express it. Or, are you worried that the US is gonna get dragged in officially now, and think that Biden is going to use this to retain power?
plastic_Man_75@reddit
Yes we are at war We are aiding them
It's a cold war because our boots not on the ground. I'm sure they are though
DRpatato@reddit
Ah yes, I agree, which is why I said technically. There is a world of difference between funding a war and actively fighting.
plastic_Man_75@reddit
We are fighting it. We just pay Ukraine to do it
DRpatato@reddit
That's what funding means. US troops are not in active engagement with Russian troops.
plastic_Man_75@reddit
That we know of
I'm sure the nsa is
Ragtime07@reddit
Are they trying to hand our country over to Trump with WW3 ramping up? It feels that way