The reason to fund Ukraine is because we said we would protect them when we stripped them of arms. Not just nukes, there was a campaign to destroy their small arms and artillery. What ever your argument is against helping them doesn't matter. We shouldn't have made promises signed treaties and stripped them of arms. We made them a target of opportunity for Russia. We made it our duty to protect the people of Ukraine. If you're upset about it, vote better next time.
@@PlanetJimmer Republican foreign relations commitee chair Dick Lugar and then senator Obama pushed a bipartisan bill and even traveled to Ukraine to show the artillery shells and anti aircraft missiles. Over 15000 tons of ammunition and 700,000 small arms. This was in 2005 feel free to look it up.
Bill said that the Russian war against Ukraine wasn't comparable to the USSR's war against Afghanistan because Afghanistan didn't border the USSR, and his panelists didn't correct him, but he was wrong: Afghanistan did indeed sit on the border of the USSR in 1979 when the war began. I was surprised no one said anything, the two are completely comparable. Jane Ferguson was on-target with that comparison.
💯 the Soviet war in Afghanistan accelerated the demise of the evil empire. The funding and arming of the mujahedeen against them was a brilliant piece of statecraft. The failure to Marshall Plan Afghanistan in the post soviet war era resulted in a power vacuum there that was filled by the Pakistani ISI, who naturally turned to their country bumpkin cousins, the Taliban, to run shit so they could secure their northern border and focus on their real rival, India.
@@d-rot Well said! People often take the wrong lesson away from arming the mujahedeen and American interventionism, and you've got it completely right.
It was not near the Motherland, It bordered USSR territory, but not the actual Russian country. Even in soviet maps, they always kept the borders to separate each country, but labeled it all under one name. Poland was still called Poland, even while under Russian occupation
@@patrickk6331 I'm unclear if that's what Maher meant, and even if so, I don't know if the point on distinguishing between the USSR and the motherland is salient here. For the purposes of comparison, the two conflicts are comparable in the fact that Russia wants to consolidate power in the pro-Russian factions in their bordering territory.
Hey Bill! I would happily be the foreign policy advisor to your writers, since you clearly have a very superficial understanding of international issues…lemme know!
It should be noted that very little of America's $110Bn assistance has actually left the US economy. Most of the US's donations have come in the form of already-produced military equipment from US stockpiles produced by US companies - 90% of said funding if Blinken's remarks are to be believed.
Its essentially giving functional yet excess (and aging) equipment to a country fighting for its existance. Equipment which was going to be replaced anyways.
The Taliban were laughing in those videos as they use our helicopters, weapons, and other machines/tools that Biden decided to "leave behind." Edit: that somewhere was Afghanistan...
The difference between Afghanistan and Ukraine is the people of Afghanistan didn't want to be a democracy even though we tried forcing on them for 20 years
@@nothuman3083 probably from the official numbers available to him. If you don't trust them, you should know this. Since antiquity, you over estimate your enemy losses and downplay your side losses. Both Russia and the West are doing this. It's a pretty standard propaganda war tool. Like what numbers do you want from Bill? You want him to form an investigative unit and send them to Ukraine to get an accurate count?
And how much debt did France accrue during that aid, and how much of a factor was it that led to their own revolution a few years later? France chose to wage war abroad but neglected their own citizens at home. It's a repeating story throughout history, as countries send their wealth abroad waging war, their own suffer at home, and tensions rise. Many once great empires have fallen as they try to over extend their resources and influence. I'm certainly happy France helped. But they certainly got the raw end of the deal.
@@lasshrugged You clearly have never been to France; the revolution is core to their national identity, something they are massively proud of and a price they were more than happy to pay (similar to the Ukrainian's whose national characteristics will undoubtedly be formed by their response to the war of aggression by Russia.... as long as Ukraine survives this existential attack). The sad thing about the modern world is the lack of acceptance that freedom isn't free and it's depressing how many people seem to be willing to accept authoritarianism if it saves them a few bucks in the short term. Even if they only care about their own financial wellbeing, always remember that in the long run, authoritarian countries do worse financially. The US is the wealthiest country in the world; it had massive inequality before Russia invaded Ukraine and it will likely have massive inequality after the war has ended. Supporting Ukraine is not the problem that needs to be addressed in the US; a fairer tax system would be a good start to addressing massive inequality (after all, the billionaires can only exist because they make use of the Infrastructure that was provided by the state, so it's not unreasonable to expect them to contribute to the development and maintenance of such infrastructure, whether it is roads, broadband or an educated workforce).
@@Boghopper9999 you missed the point entirely. How France perceives their revolution is irrelevant. The point is it resulted in a loss of life that may not have been necessary had France tended to problems at home instead of abroad, and to top it off, the U.S. fought the new French government in the Quasi war. The U.S. is over 30 trillion in debt right now, and conditions are worse at home than they have been in a very long time. Fights are breaking out in the streets in some cities on how resources are being allocated. So regardless of the percent of the U.S. defense budget that is going to Ukraine, on principle, it's too much until we start making at least some effort toward balancing the budget and solving some issues here at home. Until then, I'm not voting for any politician that supports sending more aid to Ukraine. Not supporting Ukraine is not accepting authoritarianism. There are many authoritarian countries in the world, but we can go fight them all. If someone attacked us with the intent of toppling our government with an authoritarian regime, then we should resist with everything we have. I support Ukraine's right to defend itself, but if its closest neighbors won't send the necessary military aid, then why should we? We have even less incentive than the closer neighboring countries.
Bill we aren't fighting in Ukraine the Ukrainians are. Unlike the Afgans they have a sense of country and they demonstrate that on the battlefield every day. So please don't conflate the two . ... and please don't make any smug judgements about their efforts from your warm comfortable chair .
PBS and CNN...they have never seen a war they didn't like. As a veteran it is absurd how these war hawks have free reign in the US media...owned and operated by the military industrial complex. Disgusting.
@@robertirvine6307 We can call it whatever we want....or hear it from whomever we choose, but the US media's constant push for the forever wars is as corrupt and as unfortunate as possible. Trillions in debt, the middle class in a spiral, and young men in tragic decline, are just a few of the symptoms of the desire to be an empire, by wars of conquest.
Good question but we should also remember that US gave Ukraine a tacit security guarantee in exchange for Ukraine destroying the nuclear weapons it inherited with independence from Soviet Union. US sent its own experts and destroyed a large number of Ukraine's nuclear laden intercontinental missiles. Arguably, Russia would not have casually invaded a nuclear armed Ukraine. Also remember that if Ukraine goes to Putin, so would most of Balkan and eastern Europe. That weakens NATO and America itself where Putin already has lots of assets. And last but not the least, Putin would love to see America and its world order destroyed as soon as possible. Go read Putin's long speech during his first presidency in which he boasted to make Russia great again by rebuilding Soviet Union and avenging its break up by castrating (metaphorically) NATO and the US. Putin's fiendish schemes are at work everywhere in American body politic. In Europe and in America, Putin supports all kinds of Nazi outfits but in Russia Nazis are amenable to long jail sentences even death.
False; the nuclear weapons were located in Ukrainian territory, but they could not use them because the control of the weapons was based in Russia. Also, the USSR allowed Ukraine to form its own country, but part of the agreement was that Ukraine would not become a hostile state towards Russia. So, trying to join NATO, I would argue, makes the agreement null and void. I hope for peace in the end. Why would Russia want to invade hostile states like Eastern Europe? Russia has only annexed parts of Ukraine, where the population is pro-Russia. I assume maybe Kharkiv and Odesa could also be majority pro-Russian.
Was part of the deal that nazi Ukraine would persecute ethnic minorities? Of course not. Ukraine got itself into thos mess and it's not our responsibility to save them or help them
@@englishpractiseclub4583except putin indeed announced plans of restoring great old russia, territorially, its a fact. All else is to his use of legally sounding excuse.
Sounds like GRU propaganda. Here's are the facts. At the time of independence in 1991, Ukraine held the third largest nuclear arsenal in the world, including an estimated 1900 strategic warheads, 176 intercontinental ballistic missiles and 44 strategic bombers. By 1996 Ukraine had returned all of its nuclear warheads to Russia in exchange for economic aid and security assurances, and in December 1994, Ukraine became a non-nuclear state member of Nonproliferation Treaty, NPT. In 2001 it had joined START. It took several years from 1992 signing of Lisbon Protocol for US to deactivate and remove weapons and nuclear infrastructure (ICBMs and strategic nuclear bombers) then under Ukrainian control. Your remarks legitimizing Russian invasion (to denazify) Ukraine and just annexing Russian speaking parts of Ukraine are both irrelevant and absurd. Russia includes large swaths of land inhabited by speakers of non Russian languages. Would that justify Turkey to snatch or claim those provinces, or China and Mongolia to annex Siberia based on linguistic affinity?
Bill asked : "Can we still win this one"? Bill, how many Americans died in Ukraine? We Denmark and the Netherlands are giving 1% and 0.5% of our GDP to Ukraine for military support, the USA reaches 0.3% of their GDP. We are in the process of supplying 61x F16 jets; 14x Leopard II tanks and 100x Leopard I tanks and that with 6 million (DK) and 18 million (NL) citizens. This week our foreign secretary went to Ukraine and promised again 0.5% of our GDP for support in 2024, the USA and the UK only produced a deafening silence.
There should have been a "deafening silence" at the casualty figure read off at the beginning of the set: 100,000+ for Russia and 75,000+- for Ukraine?!! If these people cannot get their #s straight, no pt. going further.
@@bertnijhof5413 Nobody cares what the hell you are doing in your Denmark or Netherlands dude, we don’t even know where you are on the map. If you are ready for your government to spend your money on some Russia-Ukrainian crap, go ahead. But don't tell others where to spend their money.
WTF? Israel is committing genocide with American tax dollars. But the question for the night is: Should we continue to support Ukraine? Talk about a perfect example of misdirection!
It makes me a little nauseous to think that helping the Ukrainians is being judged on the speed of gains in the conflict. It’s like Maher forgot what our government has been saying for a year or more. What, oh they didn’t win completely in two years so dump them. As others have said, Putin will use the victory in multiple ways, including getting enough support to attack other countries. This looks like Hitlers’ play book in the 1930s.
I don't mind supporting Ukraine and Israel, but please give back food stamps to seniors like me. The US can support foreign countries, but they can't support it's own seniors. I'm 69 years old and now that the pandemic is over, I get $23 per month instead of $281 per month. A lot of American seniors are going hungry. Shame on you Congress.
@@kentuckyfried9499 I think the Russian position is that they don’t want to occupy the entire territory of Ukraine-from the outset it’s been about ethnic Russians and keeping NATO out. I don’t know the facts and you don’t either. We are listening to propaganda. It sad to see Bill playing the game. But, the fact remains that women, kids and old men are being recruited into the fighting. That’s never a positive sign no matter how you want to spin it. Look at history.
So you want to give up so Putin gets Ukraine? Next he will invade Poland then we are in a war with our NATO allies...We will say too bad we didn't do the right thing.@@kentuckyfried9499
It's a stalemate because the aid that was promised was not delivered. You can't win without the proper tools. Send everything now and finish this thing now.
@P2WGamersSuck I'll make this real simple for the mentally challenged. 1. The US is not in a position to send billions of more dollars to the Ukraine with our crumbling infrastructure, economy, immigration issues, and homeless crisis. 2. The US can not send in US troops without a declaration of war on Russia. 3. The US can not send modern equipment because Ukraine does not know how to operate and maintain said equipment. Example Abraham's tanks which are still not deployed even though we have sent them. 4. Air support from the US would be a declaration of war. 5. Russia is using mothballed soviet era equipment and ww1 tactics. Russia has a crumbling economy. Russia's population is in decline and birth rates are bellow replacement. They are not a world threat. 6. Putin is an aging dictator whose only option is victory. If we declare war or give Ukraine enough to somehow defeat Russia they will use tactical nukes to push Ukraine back. 7. A defeated Russia means a Russia that will erupt into civil war putting one of the world's largest nuclear stock piles into the hands of not one but several strong man military dictators. This is not a simple black or white matter and anybody dumb enough to rule out nuclear conflict and gamble with the lives of billions doesn't have enough brain cells to discuss this issue.
@jacobkemp7050 If Russia nukes Ukraine in response to direct aid, guess what? The country just wrote its own suicide note. Nuclear weapons aren't there to deter help to invaded nations, there for deterring attacks on nuclear armed powers.
Uhm...speak only for yourself, buddy. Between my homecountry and Ukraine, there's only Poland. So yeah, I certainly knew about Ukraine much longer ago than 20 months. To be precise, I first heard the name "Ukraine" in 1986, when the chernobyl nuclear desaster happened....in Ukraine. I'm sure you heard about that one, right?
Exactly. It's not a difficult concept to grasp, or at least it shouldn't be. Russia can be stopped in Ukraine now or it can be stopped in Europe later. Stopping it in Europe later will be much bloodier and cost a hell of a lot more. The first thing Russia is going to do if it takes Ukraine is force citizens to serve in their military, stopping now means Russia replenishes their manpower and materiel.
@@chrisjackson1215 Please don't fan the flames of conspiracy theories, and think russia is gonna suicidaly attack nato nations directly LOL. The news wants you to believe this, yes. But it makes zero sense from a power, or military, standpoint to do so LOL.
@@chrisjackson1215 Ukraine citizens ? which one ? the dead one ? the hidden on the Rviera coast in France in luxury hotel ? stop to swallow propaganda . Europe still purchase uranium , rare metals and plently of others goods in Russia even natural gaz ...
Yes because the US citizen is an endless supply of money? Are infrastructure is failing, our schools are failing, we have a homeless crisis, and several desperate marginalized communities that all need help but let's send everything we have to ukraine to build TRENCHES
FACT 1: The USA spent $7 TRILLION that's $7,000,000,000,000) in Iraq and Afghanistan wars and LOST BOTH! Yet you expect to beat Russia, how crazy are these people?🤣🤣🤣
Since Biden took office, there seem to have been more unfavorable results in America likewise Canada. These results include effects on the markets, such as price declines and sharp increases in inflation, as well as bank failures. I wonder if the sudden increase in interest rates will help value investors or if it would be wiser to stay away from the stock and financial markets for the time being.
I truly enjoy having a portfolio coach to help me make market judgments on a daily basis. They possess a special combination of abilities that enable them to take both long and short positions, benefiting from the possibility of significant gains while also safeguarding against downward turns. Additionally, they have access to exclusive knowledge and research that virtually guarantees they will outperform. I've had a portfolio coach for more than two years, and throughout that time l've actually earned over $432k. It was a wonderful experience!
In fact, I'm not sure whether I'm permitted to say this, but l'd suggest searching for Samuel Peter Descovich as he gained a lot of attention in 2020. He is both my coach and the manager of my portfolio.
This information is valuable. I quickly searched his full name and his website appeared instantly, showcasing his impressive qualifications. Thank you for sharing.
That's why I've entrusted a fiduciary with my investment decisions. Many underestimate advisors until emotions lead to losses. My fiduciary crafted a tailored strategy aligning with my long-term goals, guiding entry and exit points for the equities I focus on. This has grown my portfolio to $700k, generating sufficient dividends for my household's needs.
Exactly. Ukraine at least is fighting a very important geoestrategic war against a clear enemy/danger against the West & the US. Israel, on the other hand, it’s simply massacrating a population of incredibly poor sheperds and children. Their constant wars in the Middle East serve no purpose except for themselves, it’s a constant source of inestability and tensions that greatly affects negatively the rest of the world, but somehow they have this blind & eternal suport from the USA no matter what. Force Israel to give back to the palestinians most of their land and let them create a state in which Israel has nothing to do and nothing to say about it. Share Jerusalem and stop giving money and blind support to the state of Israel.
@@demri123 I disagree with that, but I would balance that out with making the Israelis walk back legislation that allows it commit war crimes: The bill that decriminalizes the IDF killing non-combatants (particularly women and children). Without this, the IDF and the Israeli government are no better than HAMAS.
america just vetoed a un security council resolution for a cease fire in Gaza. americas support is unwavering, which means more trouble for the US. Theyre such a bunch of clowns
Oh, they'll stop. Maybe on the Rhine, maybe on the Seine, maybe on the Atlantic Ocean, it's hard to say. That's the problem for Americans, there's not much chance of it ever _directly_ coming to the US, so some people don't take it seriously as a threat, but they fail to realize how crucial a free Europe is to everyone's security including our own.
I can’t stop myself from pointing out that petty squabbles such as Poland’s with Ukraine over grain don’t help convince Americans that Europe is doing all it can and we need to keep helping.
@ericmichels6158 If Ukraine is our neighbor, then pretty much every country is. Europe has to be able to defend itself. And in fact, they can, we just don't offer incentive to when we send so much money. I'd be willing to come to Canada's or Mexico's aid if they were invaded because they are our actual neighbors. If they fell to some foreign power hostile to the U.S., those would make an actual ground invasion of the U.S. somewhat more possible. The sheer number of guns in the U.S. alone makes any proper land invasion a difficult proposition. Indeed, the U.S. greatest threats come from nuclear ICBM armed countries and from within. Most great countries / empires fall only when internal conditions allow it. As much as I support Ukraine's right to defend itself and am rooting for them, I will not vote for any politician who supports further aid until they stop ignoring problems here at home.
I'm so glad to hear them say that. I was ready to be angry. We can print 100 billion dollars if it means standing up for the west instead of postponing the day we have to send soldiers.
It’s also far cheaper to have universal healthcare and allow negotiation of prescription drug prices than to force people to put off medical care until it’s serious…but we never have enough money for that 🤦🏽♂️
Those people are automatons. They couldn't have an original thought to save their life. They wouldn't dare to say Victoria Nuland's name out loud. Complete cowards. Painting a picture of history that is ahistorical. For decades we promised Russia we would not move a foot East of Berlin. We broke that every chance we got until Putin saw the threat of losing Sebastopol and acted. We forced his hand and if anyone would like learn who Victoria Nuland is and how she played a major role in starting this war you'd immediately be a more honest human being than either of these two so called journalists.
Plus a lot of what we are sending there are weapons due to be decommissioned and already replaced by newer better models. The main reason we decided to send cluster munitions is because we had boatloads of them that have reached the end of their shelf life. If you want precision strikes you need to have good shells with known and stable charges or they are going to fall short or just be inaccurate. That's why Russia has to shoot 20 shells to get just one to hit while Ukraine is much more accurate. Russia is scraping the bottom of the barrel and you can bet the shells they get from North Korea aren't in their prime. Not here in the US we constantly replace old stock with new stock, old vehicle and weapons with new and better models. Plus a lot of the cost is on paper because unlike real business in the real world the Military doesn't get to depreciate the costs, that 30 year old $10 million tank is simply not worth $10 million anymore but when we figure aid it's the new cost not the depreciated cost. Not to mention it is just cheaper to give Ukraine Bradleys and Humvees and shells than it is to pay to decommission and scrap them safely
@@Goawaykidyoubotherme As a percentage of our military budget and GDP there are several countries doing more in comparison. For instance Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, and Bulgaria have all given 2 to 3 times more as a percentage of their GDP than the US has. I'm pretty sure the same can be said about Great Britain who has been unwavering in their support despite the political stability at home
I feel like they didn't answer his question. He asked if it was a winnable war. He didn't ask if it was the right thing to do. And that's what they turned it into, the whys of supporting Ukraine. And if it's not winnable, it doesn't mean we have to give up, it could mean a change in strategy to make it winnable. But to turn it into moral is to just ignore the fact that currently, Ukraine is not winning and not have to face the tough questions of what to do.
ukraine is not winning because they dont get the right weapons and not enough weapons, tanks, air defense, they should have 50 patriot systems by now not 5 ... they need air superiority! you cant amass trops without air superiority cause the enemy artillery and glide bombs will just destroy your whole army! so its skirmish mode for ukraine with which you wont get much land, so the west gets basically what they paid for …
Whilst it will take time, the US and its' allies need to increase weapons production and increase support to Ukraine. Whilst the front may be at a standstill, the war isn't. The war is wearing down Russia as well as Ukraine, and compared to Iraq ($1.9T) and Afghanistan ($2.3T), $111B so far should be considered good value to the US and its' allies.
@@someone6170 First I'm not worried about money, nor wearing down Russia. I said is the war winnable for Ukraine. One can still lose a war that's a good deal in price compared to other wars. One can lose a war and wear down your opponent. The question I asked is if the war is winnable for Ukraine.
Imagine you are beaten by English nationalist in Scotland if you utter scottish/galeic words or put/pin/hold scottish flag. That is what happened with Hungarians living in west ukraine (who were cut from their mother country in 1920 by Treaty of Trianon). I live 50 miles form Ukraine border and we know. there is even a law, you can check, which forbids in school to use your own language in school. If you use/pin/waive Hungarian flag there you are beaten until you bleed. Same applies for Russians there. But you in the west media bubble do not hear these. The Minsk agreement was to assure these rights but Ukraine ignored it with the support of the west. Zelensky has a multi million euro palace in Tuscana, Italy, he has had it even before he became president. Where do you think that money came from? His wealth is estimated 1,5 billion USD. Ukraine is one of the most corrupt countries in the world and is far from being a democracy Russia cannot be beaten only talks give peace but USA does not want it. Even if Ukraine wins back all territories, what is guarantee Russia will not go back some months later? Nothing. Ukraine is in ruins, the economy is bankrupted, the people fled, those who stayed are in life lasting war shock. The war does not seem to end soon. There is no winner in this. The solution is to respect the concern of Russia and for Ukraine to respect minority rights. The beneficiaries of the war are USA and China. USA gas 4x more expensive than Russian, makes EU/Germany uncompetitive, end of EU economy. EU/UK will crush due to incompetent leaders who think a long term stable peace and prosperity in Europe is possible without or by "beating" Russia (whatever it means) and a strong European/German economy based on cheap Russian gas scares the hell out of the USA. Prospect of Ukraine joining NATO, NATO expansion and the oppression of minorities in ukraine led to this. This is the west paying the cost of freedom. the west decided to pay the »cost of freedom«, so pin the ukrainian flag onto your shirt and enjoy the western style of living while it lasts.
Russia could end the war today by going back to Russia. The solution is for the Russian people to get rid of Putin, since the elections are fake somebody needs to do like Prigozhin, but succeed.
Ukraine wasn't the reason why the US doesn't do that. that was happening before and it will keep happening after. And to some extend the US does that but not in a functional way.
1999 ...Putin was a shoo-in by Yeltsin ...for a 4 year term... 2 x term limit as per the US .. Putin is Running in March 2024 which could theoretically see Putin in power until 2036... 39 years in power off a 4 year / 2 term base.. That is the basis for the Trump blueprint currently being used by Miller et al...
it's not the "US's" war, so no, we need to stop the Biden money laundering scheme to the military industrial complex and all the associated cronies around it from stealing tax payer dollars for their own personal wealth.
@@AdamYoudell He did that back in 2008 with Dmitry Medvedev. It seems he didn't care for it, so he took back over. Like most dictators, I assume that he's not a big fan of sharing power or stature.
If Ukraine got 70,000 dead, then can someone explain to me why the average age of their force is 43, as well, why are they grabbing people off the street to serve in the Ukraine force? Your numbers are incorrect my good sir.
@@philster6383 LMAO Russia has the largest amount of nuclear warheads. You can't be that dumb to believe Ukraine was EVER going to win. LOL WOW how foolish are you, Phil!
The cold War has been over for years... Let's count the number of sworn enemies... Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, Iraq... none of which are even in the same continent. Are they really a real threat or a made up fictional enemy to justify more military spending?
How is Russia our sworn enemy? Russia has some chance of actually being allied with the West (small, but greater than China). We just keep pushing Russia further and further into an alliance with China instead. We are horrible at negotiating and doing anything militarily that doesn't just exacerbate the situation. We should never have made any agreements with Ukraine, we should not have led them into believing entering NATO would ever be an option, and so forth. If we just stayed out of things, they'd likely have more positive outcome. At any rate, I frankly don't care what agreements former U.S. leaders made in the past, I don't owe anyone a vote based on that. I will not vote for anyone that promises more aid to Ukraine without a specific end term, and certainly won't vote for anyone that says they will put troops on the ground.
yeah, lets fight the industrial military complex and lets live like Hippies while we let Putin take what he wants. That strategy just worked fine with good old Adolf. He wanted the Sudetenland, lets give it to him, he wanted Austria, lets give it to him, then he wanted Poland and 60 million deaths later one acknowledged that it would have been cheaper and would have saved millions of lives if we stopped him early.
I think the question about how long should we support our allies will vary from person to person. But the answer is... We will support our allies for as long as the ones that are in control determine we will.
@@shaneelliott6658 fair. Collectively then the true answer is that the voters will decide. However, we all don’t start with the same understanding of things.
0% of Palestinians polled had a favourable view of America. Israel had one of the highest rates in the world of pro-US opinion. Palestinians support the death penalty for converting to Christianity. It's an absolute no-brainer for Americans to support Israel. Just as much as supporting South Korea against North Korea.
Learn history, you might understand why we need to continue helping, unless you want us to get involved in the war and then the money increases ten fold...it is funny hearing so many fools saying no more money for Ukraine, since they never learned their history.@@cc8751
It's funny how routinely the only point of agreement from a senior CNN correspondent and the RNC is the perpetual need for the American machine to grow and conquer.
The only war machine currently active is Putin's army....if our war machine was on the move...you would know it. Putin's orks would be knocked back to MOscow by now if Ukraine had the military capability the USA has.
grow and conquer is what Putin wants, the US is just helping people who desperately try to save their lives and homes against a power hungry dictator and are meanwhile saving the West.
What the last guy said is VERY true. In hindsight, France could have beaten Germany (1938) after they just taken over the Sudetenland from Czech. But because France and UK let Hitler just take the vast industralized Sudetenland which increased tank production... they gave Europe on a silver platter to Hitler, sparking WW2. The lesson: whenever you can stop aggression, you must! If not for the benefit of mankind, do it for your own economy in the long-term...
I get the logic in your statement. The problem becomes for how long before the funders of a war become the fighters of the war and thus convincing your people that it's worth sacrificing your sons, and in some case daughters, to die for their country but not really their country.
I could argue Hitler would never have come to power if not for the oppressive Versailles treaty. France and Germany would have come to a much fairer treaty due to the stalemate if the USA had not intervened in WWI. That would have avoided 10s of millions of deaths. So the lesson: avoid entangling alliances and keep out of others business.
@@jp1135 Even further than that, WW1 wouldn't have started were it not for all the entangling alliances formed after the last great war before that, the Crimean war, was it? History and all that rhyming...
If it takes time wind out of the blowhard Republican voices why not do more? Look at the noise Trump made over virtually nothing and still many people believe he built that wall.
The US promised to protect Ukraine from Russia in order to get them to relinquish the nuclear weapons remaining in Ukraine after the breakup of the Soviet Union. Won't be a surprise if the US goes back on their promise as it is SOP for them.
The US government promised to uphold the Constitution. Government officials are sworn in promising that. They've managed to thoroughly violate the Constitution. Promises don't mean anything.
I wish there were more references to this. The UK and the USA guarantees Ukrainian sovereignty when they VOLUNTARILY gave up their enormous arsenal of nuclear weapons. Putin wouldn’t have taken any parts of the country had Ukraine kept their weapons. The US’s credibility used to mean something and this is just like the betrayal of the Kurds or Afghans who assisted the US military. We toss people overboard when they no longer serve us which is no way to maintain moral or any other kind of authority in the long run game of geopolitics.
Great point. For America to ask the Ukrainians to give up their nuclear weapons, and to then back away from supporting them when they are attacked, would be evil in itself and would send a dreadful message to both allies and foes.
@@ALFarrell-kv6ok You two know that Russia promised to behave in that treaty too, right? All that to say, I agree with you both as far as the US is concerned. No time for playing around.
We do not have the luxury to sit this one out like we did in the 1930’s. From 1938 to 1945 Hitler and the Nazi’s invaded and occupied 20 countries. Putin would surly go into Poland after Ukraine.
The main difference in the war in Ukraine is that the Ukrainians are motivated to fight it without our help (not win it, at least in the near future). There's no arm twisting, no winning hearts and minds. In Afghanistan starting 2005, the rural areas were never on the US side. The police and army were only in it for the money, as soon as it got dangerous they bailed and collapsed in weeks. The tragedy is Urkraine could have taken much more territory and be in a firm negotiating position if we had gone all in and fully equipped them with ATACAMS from the beginning. As it is, it's not real money, it's simply accounting, assets moving from "we gotta pay for retirement and destruction column" to "hey, these guys could use it, let's give it to Ukraine!" column. More "We are redecorating, why don't we give last years new furniture to Goodwill so somebody who needs it can use almost new stuff" From a cold hearted asset value view, we are getting so much information out of use, tactics, etc. that it more than pays for itself. It's like signing up for the customer card at the grocery store, they used to have to pay for surveys, now they see in real time the demographics of who is using what, so they get the information for free, even with a discount or whatever they are more than making the money back in selling what people want to buy.
And most of the money "given" to Ukraine is spent in the US. But the intelligence haul from this war is going to save American lives if shit gets hot with China. The most important reason though is IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO. Which is why the Republicans don't want to do it. Traitors.
They simply do not have the hardware necessary because Europe and the USA have been sandbagging aid the entire time. Ideally Ukraine should have 4 fighter wings of mixed fighter /bomber aircraft, ability to run night ops, about 100 more HIMARS with thousands of ATACAMS, and cluster munitions. We have defense contractors that can make a cluster airburst munition that is lethal in a circular radius greater than 2 football fields
Thanx for putting it simply enough so the 3rd grade mentalities that don’t understand have a chance to grasp the reality of the situation. Very good reply!
2:46 You should punish aggression, but you should not conflate "failure to punish" something with "rewarding" it. The distinction between reward and the absence of punishment is a staple of behavioral management and those who conflate them should not be snowcloning the language of behavioral management in the first place. It may seem a trivial point, but that kind of misuse of words makes me wonder about his agenda, even if I otherwise agree with his point. :/
The problem is that Putin spins everything as victory. So the use of the word "reward" is fitting. What's unforgivable is using the word "stalemate" or "frozen". We are nowhere near seeing the violence stop. US support to Ukraine has trickled down to the lowest point over the past 2 months. It's also been the highest casualty count of Russian troops for the last 2 months. And if Ukraines 3 to 1 estimate of their own casualties are accurate, then it's been a blood bath. If Putin isn't stopped then it sends a message to Xi, Hamas, the Iranian regime, & Trump that we're ok with their world view of everybody starting wars with their neighbours without consequence. Syria, Ukraine, Armenia. They're all victims of Putin's "Multipolar" world order. And we have to acknowledge that support Ukraine or not, the violence won't stop unless Putin is 6 feet under and rotting in hell.
The Ukrainian war is not a stalemate. If we would have given what they needed along with the training sooner this would have been over. Even more if the world didn’t turn a blind eye when Russia invaded Crimea. Things should have been stopped then.
This is a Neville Chamberlain moment. I'm from Czech republic, trust me, Putin won't stop. In 2-3 years the conflict will restart (he'll find himself a reason). And Russia will have a much more prepared army and much bigger military industrial complex. I understand that it's expensive for the US to send money - *so don't* only send old military equipment. It costs more to de-militarize it in US, that to send it to UA. And there are LOT'S of that. US can easily *decrease* the money aid, I think Europeans can handle that part - but *keep sending weapons* EU is building out it's military production as fast as we can, but can't be done over night.
Here's the issue as an American. It's not about the money, it's about is this war winnable for Ukraine? If not, then there needs to be a change in strategy to enable Ukraine to win. Saying it's a Chamberlain moment or Putin will go further if the West abandons Ukraine doesn't at all answer the question, is the war winnable for Ukraine. The current strategy has resulted in a stalemate. A change in strategy is not just sending more weapons. That is the strategy right now, sending more and more advanced weapons. Soon they will have F-16s which is going to be a "game changer" And a few months from then, people will forget about it being a game changer like the other weapons that came before it like tanks and other missiles and stuff. Yes Ukraine obviously needs weapons to fight the war but no one wants to talk about the strategy, they want to wax on about the morality of supporting Ukraine to avoid talking about if the strategy is working and if we need a rethink. The top Ukrainian general already said in US media that even if Ukraine got every weapons they needed from the West, they wouldn't have enough soldiers. I mean, with that information, that suggest there needs to be a new strategy, not just continue the current one. But making a new strategy requires tough conversations, so people would rather just say, we have to support Ukraine for as long as it takes and kick the can down the road.
You are full of it. The Russian army is barely able to conquer the Eastern part of Ukraine which is Russian speaking. You are buying the propaganda that wants us to give billions to the arms industry to save us from the bad Russians. Grow up and face the facts. Every warmonger is lusting after money.
And Bill contradicted himself, he wants to take the pressure off the Russians because they won't attack a NATO country, but also thinks that Trump will pull out of NATO if he gets elected, which means Russia will attack then:)
😂😂😂 Americans spent trillions of dollars and untold lives on the Iraq war, where the opponent was not a real threat, but they don’t want to spend a fraction of that money to counter Putin, who has been waging asymmetrical warfare on them for ten years. Americans are so stupid.
@@userofplatform Well, you're not policing shit in Ukraine. You're SUPPORTING Ukraine defend their freedom and their democracy. Putin ATTACKED Ukraine for no good reason and he BLAMES the US for it. So if you don't want Poland and Germany to be next, you better help Ukraine stop Putin's ambitions to conquer ALL OF the USSR's realm...including East Germany. If Putin wins in Ukraine and then decides that Poland is next, YOU WILL HAVE TO SEND TROOPS, because Poland is YOUR FREAKING NATO ALLY! So you can keep supporting Ukraine, just like Poland does and Germany and France and the UK and the Netherlands, etc., etc., so they will put an end to Putin's dreams of Russia conquering all of Europe....OR...you will HAVE to face world war III.
I agree that it is not totally an Ukrainians fight, it is a fight between Russia and NATO. I thought that we are out of Cold War mentality at this point, but I was wrong.
I always thought a good joint would open your mind a little, Bill go back to your weed supplier and get a refund...it ain't working...Ukraine has lost upto 500,000 and Russia upto 100,000 and that's not taking into consideration the severely injured on both sides...
The war is like two nations sat at a blackjack table, the house (military industrial complex) always wins, allies are placing side bets, and this either ends with an asymmetrical draw or someone zero’s out first with no one willing to buy back in on their behalf.
Not one minute. We started this fight, we escalated it, and we are responsible. The US helped overthrow the leader of the Ukraine back in 2014. The US pushed forcing them to join NATO, despite that being a red line Russia CANNOT let happen (for the same reason we cannot let Canada or Mexico join BRICKS or something similar), and the US has blocked every attempt at peace in the region because millions of Ukrainian people dying is good for lobbyists and the ultra wealthy.
Its at a stalemate because the allies were dragging there feet on tanks and long range missiles. Scalps were sent mid May, Storm shadows in July, and ATACMS in August. The fighter jets are still not there. All too late for the spring counteroffensive.
It is pathetic the west has such capabilities to help Ukraine, but instead doing so little. I believe the west and NATO could win this war any moment, but for unkown reason they are letting Ukraine to bleed
@@papartiska… why is it American responsibility to bail out Ukraine? Europe and Asia are right there, what have they done to assist? We gave over $100B to help a corrupt government and leader Zelensky, and have had ZERO accountability for where all that money went. This isn’t our war, it’s Ukraine’s.
@@chrisrogers5974 I don't know maybe if America and the west won't defend it's interest maybe nobody will. If you like you can wait untill putin invade NATO, then it will cost much more. It's up to you. You want to pay much more it's your choise
strictly speaking it's the 2024 allocation that's blocked. The 2023 allocation is still ongoing, another tranche was sent recently and there are still billions in that bucket.
True, it is laughable that we finally agreed to send them tanks, so we gave them 30 tanks, while we have 1,500 tanks sitting in the Nevada desert for over a decade, doing nothing.
I would agree that Putin will not stop until NATO is sufficiently far enough away from his borders. But can someone explain to me how would he invade eastern Europe if he cannot advance in Ukraine anymore? Can someone else also explain to me how does Ukraine remove Russia from the territory they have gained since Ukraine is losing manpower?
this has less to do with NATO on his borders than imperialistic desire of reconstituting the old empire. NATO Baltic states have lived peacefully on Russias border for 30 years now, Putin is not threatened by NATO This is now a frozen conflict at existing front along the Dnipro and north to Belarus border. both sides have discovered how difficult it is to breach existing lines without air superiority. The problem for Putin is all of the Ukrainian territory he now holds, from the Kerch bridge to Kharkiv, is reachable with Western missiles and drones. Sevastopol is no longer a viable sea port for Russia’s Black Sea navy. The Kerch bridge may not be long for this world. So even though Russia can hold territory, at some point it comes at greater cost than its worth
@ClownCarCoup i disagree, it is almost entirely NATO encroaching on Russia's doorstep. The imperial regime excuse is old and tired out. It's a boogie man argument pushed by main stream media.
Your questions can not be answered because it will not happen. Putin has zero desire to take more of Ukraine, much less western Europe (not Eastern like you said). He nor Russia have never postured in any way that suggests that that is the goal. Why you believe that is beyond me
@@Benny-zo3qh According to the United Nations definition, countries within _Eastern_ Europe are Belarus, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, *Moldova,* Poland, Romania, Slovakia, *Ukraine,* and the western part of the Russian Federation. We know Russia has been attempting to control/influence Ukraine since 2014. Russia has been attempting control Moldova via Transnistria for even longer. Putin has said himself he’d like to reconstitute former Soviet/Warsaw pact empire in some fashion, which includes Eastern Europe. Anyone paying attention knows this
@ClownCarCoup For the purposes of what we're talking about and practically speaking, NATO is the west. An American backed coup took over Ukraine in 2014, so I'm not sure what Russian control you're referring to. They (Ukraine) were killing ethnic Russians in the Donbas, and Putin wanted to stop it, hense why they had the Minsk agreement, which was violated by Ukraine with the help of America. With regards to the reconstruction of the Soviet Union Putin said: "The USSR is no more. We can't bring the past back. And Russia doesn't need it anymore. We are not striving towards that." I could go on for days and post FULL quotes that clearly point out that it's not his aim to bring back the USSR. If you only listen to clips and pieces from Western mainstream media, then yes, of course, he wants to bring it back, and yes, of course, he will invade NATO.
The point he is trying to make is war in this day and age isn't necessary. In the past, country's invaded for land, resources or enslavement of people. With the modern-day technology, no one needs more land. Also now wars are fought as far away from each other as possible. Conventional war will be extinct soon, it will all be terrorism and gorilla warfare. Not army vs army on a battlefield.
This topic? I mean..... 😅When is he not? He's a reactionary pretending to be an actual comedian, he is always short sighted. The only utility his show provides is if he has informed panelists on(but even that is less common these days, unfortunately) personally I've always seen him as an idiot who sometimes has smart people on, which can be entertaining and useful if the writers decide to put some decent talking points and questions in the show)
Wasted 20 years in Afghanistan, 2 trillion dollars. Another 20 years in Vietnam, probably another trillion in today's dollars. Give them what then need, quite prolonging the war by holding back equipment, and let Ukraine win it and move on.
This is only a portion of their debate on Ukraine. Definitely view the full panel portion of this episode if you can. Interesting, thought-provoking comments all around, even more than usual in my opinion. Especially great to have a long-experienced international war correspondent such as Jane on the show and at this time.
The only thing thought provoking about this conversation was how seemingly smart people can have such an unintellectual take on the Ukraine war. If you were impressed by this, well then, you're easily impressed...
The reason to fund Ukraine is because we said we would protect them when we stripped them of arms. Not just nukes, there was a campaign to destroy their small arms and artillery. What ever your argument is against helping them doesn't matter. We shouldn't have made promises signed treaties and stripped them of arms. We made them a target of opportunity for Russia. We made it our duty to protect the people of Ukraine. If you're upset about it, vote better next time.
We stripped them of their arms? Who is we? That sounds like BS.
@@PlanetJimmer Republican foreign relations commitee chair Dick Lugar and then senator Obama pushed a bipartisan bill and even traveled to Ukraine to show the artillery shells and anti aircraft missiles. Over 15000 tons of ammunition and 700,000 small arms. This was in 2005 feel free to look it up.
Bill said that the Russian war against Ukraine wasn't comparable to the USSR's war against Afghanistan because Afghanistan didn't border the USSR, and his panelists didn't correct him, but he was wrong: Afghanistan did indeed sit on the border of the USSR in 1979 when the war began. I was surprised no one said anything, the two are completely comparable. Jane Ferguson was on-target with that comparison.
💯 the Soviet war in Afghanistan accelerated the demise of the evil empire. The funding and arming of the mujahedeen against them was a brilliant piece of statecraft. The failure to Marshall Plan Afghanistan in the post soviet war era resulted in a power vacuum there that was filled by the Pakistani ISI, who naturally turned to their country bumpkin cousins, the Taliban, to run shit so they could secure their northern border and focus on their real rival, India.
Those two CNN guy's are liers. You're a smart guy.
@@d-rot Well said! People often take the wrong lesson away from arming the mujahedeen and American interventionism, and you've got it completely right.
It was not near the Motherland, It bordered USSR territory, but not the actual Russian country. Even in soviet maps, they always kept the borders to separate each country, but labeled it all under one name. Poland was still called Poland, even while under Russian occupation
@@patrickk6331 I'm unclear if that's what Maher meant, and even if so, I don't know if the point on distinguishing between the USSR and the motherland is salient here. For the purposes of comparison, the two conflicts are comparable in the fact that Russia wants to consolidate power in the pro-Russian factions in their bordering territory.
Neither one answered the question about how long.
Hey Bill! I would happily be the foreign policy advisor to your writers, since you clearly have a very superficial understanding of international issues…lemme know!
It should be noted that very little of America's $110Bn assistance has actually left the US economy. Most of the US's donations have come in the form of already-produced military equipment from US stockpiles produced by US companies - 90% of said funding if Blinken's remarks are to be believed.
You still have to replace it smart one. Wrong again
@@deadpoolwolverine9331 That's exactly his point, my guy. The money spent replacing the stockpiles is circulating in the US economy.
Its essentially giving functional yet excess (and aging) equipment to a country fighting for its existance. Equipment which was going to be replaced anyways.
Zelenskyy didn’t get stupid rich on munitions.
exactly. that money is partly the reason why the us economy is doing so well.
Typical US . Turn your backs on Allie’s. Happens all the time.
And where are you from?
Should have never supported the Ukrainian Nazi's to begin with. Maybe research the AZOV battalion of Ukraine?
Explain how Ukraine is an ally? What have they ever done for us?
They are not our ali.
@@peggyivey5828 I suppose you think Russia and china are.
We don't reward aggression......Somewhere The Taliban is laughing
The military industrial complex is laughing its way to the bank.
Spoken like a true neocon who is pro war, pro NATO, pro big pharma and more.
Boeing said let them have the weapons, but we'll need more money for new stuff 😅
The Taliban were laughing in those videos as they use our helicopters, weapons, and other machines/tools that Biden decided to "leave behind."
Edit: that somewhere was Afghanistan...
The difference between Afghanistan and Ukraine is the people of Afghanistan didn't want to be a democracy even though we tried forcing on them for 20 years
How many companies made billions?
A lot
Maher needs to research more & smoke less pot.
A lot of russian companies, yes.
150 thousand Russians dead and 70 thousand Ukrainians? Where did those figures come from? Come on Bill.
The bodies actually seen from space.
That was the numbers straight from the C I>>A propaganda machine....as are these guests.
The numbers are about right, excluding UA civilians
@@nothuman3083 probably from the official numbers available to him. If you don't trust them, you should know this. Since antiquity, you over estimate your enemy losses and downplay your side losses. Both Russia and the West are doing this. It's a pretty standard propaganda war tool.
Like what numbers do you want from Bill? You want him to form an investigative unit and send them to Ukraine to get an accurate count?
More like 70K dead Russians and 300K dead Ukrainians
Until Russia is bled completely dry. We made a deal back in the 90s with them. NO going back on deals like that.
No we didn't
I dunno, how long did France aid us in the Revolution?
And how much debt did France accrue during that aid, and how much of a factor was it that led to their own revolution a few years later? France chose to wage war abroad but neglected their own citizens at home.
It's a repeating story throughout history, as countries send their wealth abroad waging war, their own suffer at home, and tensions rise. Many once great empires have fallen as they try to over extend their resources and influence.
I'm certainly happy France helped. But they certainly got the raw end of the deal.
@@lasshrugged You clearly have never been to France; the revolution is core to their national identity, something they are massively proud of and a price they were more than happy to pay (similar to the Ukrainian's whose national characteristics will undoubtedly be formed by their response to the war of aggression by Russia.... as long as Ukraine survives this existential attack).
The sad thing about the modern world is the lack of acceptance that freedom isn't free and it's depressing how many people seem to be willing to accept authoritarianism if it saves them a few bucks in the short term. Even if they only care about their own financial wellbeing, always remember that in the long run, authoritarian countries do worse financially.
The US is the wealthiest country in the world; it had massive inequality before Russia invaded Ukraine and it will likely have massive inequality after the war has ended. Supporting Ukraine is not the problem that needs to be addressed in the US; a fairer tax system would be a good start to addressing massive inequality (after all, the billionaires can only exist because they make use of the Infrastructure that was provided by the state, so it's not unreasonable to expect them to contribute to the development and maintenance of such infrastructure, whether it is roads, broadband or an educated workforce).
Lol france wasn't aiding the US. France was fighting Britain. Very different
The United States is not aiding Ukraine, it's fighting Putin.@@diegoflores9237
@@Boghopper9999 you missed the point entirely. How France perceives their revolution is irrelevant. The point is it resulted in a loss of life that may not have been necessary had France tended to problems at home instead of abroad, and to top it off, the U.S. fought the new French government in the Quasi war.
The U.S. is over 30 trillion in debt right now, and conditions are worse at home than they have been in a very long time. Fights are breaking out in the streets in some cities on how resources are being allocated. So regardless of the percent of the U.S. defense budget that is going to Ukraine, on principle, it's too much until we start making at least some effort toward balancing the budget and solving some issues here at home. Until then, I'm not voting for any politician that supports sending more aid to Ukraine.
Not supporting Ukraine is not accepting authoritarianism. There are many authoritarian countries in the world, but we can go fight them all. If someone attacked us with the intent of toppling our government with an authoritarian regime, then we should resist with everything we have. I support Ukraine's right to defend itself, but if its closest neighbors won't send the necessary military aid, then why should we? We have even less incentive than the closer neighboring countries.
Propaganda
Straight up
Bill we aren't fighting in Ukraine the Ukrainians are.
Unlike the Afgans they have a sense of country and they demonstrate that on the battlefield every day.
So please don't conflate the two .
... and please don't make any smug judgements about their efforts from your warm comfortable chair .
The propaganda is thick here
PBS and CNN...they have never seen a war they didn't like. As a veteran it is absurd how these war hawks have free reign in the US media...owned and operated by the military industrial complex. Disgusting.
President Lincoln WAS A REPUBLICAN FREEING THE SLAVES FROM DEMOCRATS!!!!!!!
Is it fake news or a hoax? Do you prefer hearing Hannity and Trump telling you the facts?
@@robertirvine6307 We can call it whatever we want....or hear it from whomever we choose, but the US media's constant push for the forever wars is as corrupt and as unfortunate as possible. Trillions in debt, the middle class in a spiral, and young men in tragic decline, are just a few of the symptoms of the desire to be an empire, by wars of conquest.
@@robertirvine6307wow senstive much little liberal do you need your safe space of lies and rainbows
Good question but we should also remember that US gave Ukraine a tacit security guarantee in exchange for Ukraine destroying the nuclear weapons it inherited with independence from Soviet Union. US sent its own experts and destroyed a large number of Ukraine's nuclear laden intercontinental missiles. Arguably, Russia would not have casually invaded a nuclear armed Ukraine. Also remember that if Ukraine goes to Putin, so would most of Balkan and eastern Europe. That weakens NATO and America itself where Putin already has lots of assets. And last but not the least, Putin would love to see America and its world order destroyed as soon as possible. Go read Putin's long speech during his first presidency in which he boasted to make Russia great again by rebuilding Soviet Union and avenging its break up by castrating (metaphorically) NATO and the US. Putin's fiendish schemes are at work everywhere in American body politic. In Europe and in America, Putin supports all kinds of Nazi outfits but in Russia Nazis are amenable to long jail sentences even death.
False; the nuclear weapons were located in Ukrainian territory, but they could not use them because the control of the weapons was based in Russia. Also, the USSR allowed Ukraine to form its own country, but part of the agreement was that Ukraine would not become a hostile state towards Russia. So, trying to join NATO, I would argue, makes the agreement null and void. I hope for peace in the end. Why would Russia want to invade hostile states like Eastern Europe? Russia has only annexed parts of Ukraine, where the population is pro-Russia. I assume maybe Kharkiv and Odesa could also be majority pro-Russian.
Was part of the deal that nazi Ukraine would persecute ethnic minorities? Of course not. Ukraine got itself into thos mess and it's not our responsibility to save them or help them
@@englishpractiseclub4583except putin indeed announced plans of restoring great old russia, territorially, its a fact. All else is to his use of legally sounding excuse.
correct
Sounds like GRU propaganda. Here's are the facts. At the time of independence in 1991, Ukraine held the third largest nuclear arsenal in the world, including an estimated 1900 strategic warheads, 176 intercontinental ballistic missiles and 44 strategic bombers. By 1996 Ukraine had returned all of its nuclear warheads to Russia in exchange for economic aid and security assurances, and in December 1994, Ukraine became a non-nuclear state member of Nonproliferation Treaty, NPT. In 2001 it had joined START. It took several years from 1992 signing of Lisbon Protocol for US to deactivate and remove weapons and nuclear infrastructure (ICBMs and strategic nuclear bombers) then under Ukrainian control. Your remarks legitimizing Russian invasion (to denazify) Ukraine and just annexing Russian speaking parts of Ukraine are both irrelevant and absurd. Russia includes large swaths of land inhabited by speakers of non Russian languages. Would that justify Turkey to snatch or claim those provinces, or China and Mongolia to annex Siberia based on linguistic affinity?
Bill asked : "Can we still win this one"? Bill, how many Americans died in Ukraine?
We Denmark and the Netherlands are giving 1% and 0.5% of our GDP to Ukraine for military support, the USA reaches 0.3% of their GDP. We are in the process of supplying 61x F16 jets; 14x Leopard II tanks and 100x Leopard I tanks and that with 6 million (DK) and 18 million (NL) citizens. This week our foreign secretary went to Ukraine and promised again 0.5% of our GDP for support in 2024, the USA and the UK only produced a deafening silence.
There should have been a "deafening silence" at the casualty figure read off at the beginning of the set: 100,000+ for Russia and 75,000+- for Ukraine?!! If these people cannot get their #s straight, no pt. going further.
@@nomadscavenger Traitor or Russian Troll?
@@bertnijhof5413 Nobody cares what the hell you are doing in your Denmark or Netherlands dude, we don’t even know where you are on the map. If you are ready for your government to spend your money on some Russia-Ukrainian crap, go ahead. But don't tell others where to spend their money.
@@twss2859 another Russian troll
WTF?
Israel is committing genocide with American tax dollars.
But the question for the night is: Should we continue to support Ukraine?
Talk about a perfect example of misdirection!
It’s trying to get rid of Hamas, that wants to commit genocide against Israel.
It makes me a little nauseous to think that helping the Ukrainians is being judged on the speed of gains in the conflict. It’s like Maher forgot what our government has been saying for a year or more. What, oh they didn’t win completely in two years so dump them. As others have said, Putin will use the victory in multiple ways, including getting enough support to attack other countries. This looks like Hitlers’ play book in the 1930s.
That's exactly what they want us to think. It's a proxy war, nothing more. The government doesn't give a shit about Ukrainians. Lmao
I don't mind supporting Ukraine and Israel, but please give back food stamps to seniors like me. The US can support foreign countries, but they can't support it's own seniors. I'm 69 years old and now that the pandemic is over, I get $23 per month instead of $281 per month. A lot of American seniors are going hungry. Shame on you Congress.
Stalemate? Which side is recruiting women , children and old men to fight Bill?
The lines have barely moved in 1 year that's a stalemate brother.
@@kentuckyfried9499
I think the Russian position is that they don’t want to occupy the entire territory of Ukraine-from the outset it’s been about ethnic Russians and keeping NATO out.
I don’t know the facts and you don’t either. We are listening to propaganda. It sad to see Bill playing the game. But, the fact remains that women, kids and old men are being recruited into the fighting. That’s never a positive sign no matter how you want to spin it. Look at history.
So you want to give up so Putin gets Ukraine? Next he will invade Poland then we are in a war with our NATO allies...We will say too bad we didn't do the right thing.@@kentuckyfried9499
Ukraine?
It's a stalemate because the aid that was promised was not delivered. You can't win without the proper tools. Send everything now and finish this thing now.
Finish would mean a nuclear war do you really think Russia will just admit defeat and leave?
NO
@@jacobkemp7050it wouldnt mean a nuclear war. Anyone with a brain knows they arent dropping nukes.
@P2WGamersSuck I'll make this real simple for the mentally challenged.
1. The US is not in a position to send billions of more dollars to the Ukraine with our crumbling infrastructure, economy, immigration issues, and homeless crisis.
2. The US can not send in US troops without a declaration of war on Russia.
3. The US can not send modern equipment because Ukraine does not know how to operate and maintain said equipment. Example Abraham's tanks which are still not deployed even though we have sent them.
4. Air support from the US would be a declaration of war.
5. Russia is using mothballed soviet era equipment and ww1 tactics. Russia has a crumbling economy. Russia's population is in decline and birth rates are bellow replacement. They are not a world threat.
6. Putin is an aging dictator whose only option is victory. If we declare war or give Ukraine enough to somehow defeat Russia they will use tactical nukes to push Ukraine back.
7. A defeated Russia means a Russia that will erupt into civil war putting one of the world's largest nuclear stock piles into the hands of not one but several strong man military dictators.
This is not a simple black or white matter and anybody dumb enough to rule out nuclear conflict and gamble with the lives of billions doesn't have enough brain cells to discuss this issue.
@jacobkemp7050 If Russia nukes Ukraine in response to direct aid, guess what? The country just wrote its own suicide note. Nuclear weapons aren't there to deter help to invaded nations, there for deterring attacks on nuclear armed powers.
1:00 The look on Bill's face is like his teenage kid just maxed out his credit card LOL
Iraq and Afghanistan were not willing to fight. We finally back a country that is willing to fight, and now we want to walk away from them.
No, but if our crazy president won't stop the invasion at the southern border of the US he has no bussiness asking for money to protect Ukrain.
no u base your opinion what you hear in your western media. the situation is far worse.
@tokajileo what's the far worse?:) That Ukrainians don't want to fight?:)
No true, they fought They need air support, and Bidum pulled the support.
"Nothing to fight with", we left $80B in military equipment in Afghanistan.@@cblack4413
At the very end there......ABSOLUTELY SPOT ON !!!!!!
We can’t reward aggression, like Americas aggression in Iraq, Cuba and countless other Nations?
Great! someone finally used the "whataboutism" argument. Now I feel better lol
@@gregtarris9057thats what bots do
The comparison to WW 1 wasn't even supposed to be a joke I guess ...
There seem to be a lot of self-recognized experts on Ukraine in here, who had never heard of the country 20 months ago 🙄
Reminds me of after 9/11 when people could all of a sudden be able to name cities in Afghanistan
and have now idea how insanely corrupt and undemocratic it has always been. no different from Russia in that regard
Uhm...speak only for yourself, buddy. Between my homecountry and Ukraine, there's only Poland. So yeah, I certainly knew about Ukraine much longer ago than 20 months. To be precise, I first heard the name "Ukraine" in 1986, when the chernobyl nuclear desaster happened....in Ukraine. I'm sure you heard about that one, right?
@@NKA23 I live in Ukraine......buddy 🙄
@@NKA23 I've also been to Chernobyl 3 times, have you?
Not to mention handing Putin all of Ukraine's natural resources to use on the borders of Poland and Romania.
Exactly. It's not a difficult concept to grasp, or at least it shouldn't be. Russia can be stopped in Ukraine now or it can be stopped in Europe later. Stopping it in Europe later will be much bloodier and cost a hell of a lot more. The first thing Russia is going to do if it takes Ukraine is force citizens to serve in their military, stopping now means Russia replenishes their manpower and materiel.
BS. If it is that much of a threat then NATO needs to flip for the bill.
@@mananimal3644The US is part of NATO 🙄
@@chrisjackson1215 Please don't fan the flames of conspiracy theories, and think russia is gonna suicidaly attack nato nations directly LOL. The news wants you to believe this, yes. But it makes zero sense from a power, or military, standpoint to do so LOL.
@@chrisjackson1215 Ukraine citizens ? which one ? the dead one ? the hidden on the Rviera coast in France in luxury hotel ? stop to swallow propaganda . Europe still purchase uranium , rare metals and plently of others goods in Russia even natural gaz ...
"As long as it takes" to defeat Russia, at least that was the promise.
Until Ukraine runs out of men? Silly
@@cc8751 that is a very likely outcome, but was rarely said in the same sentence.
Yes because the US citizen is an endless supply of money? Are infrastructure is failing, our schools are failing, we have a homeless crisis, and several desperate marginalized communities that all need help but let's send everything we have to ukraine to build TRENCHES
Ukraine will never defeat Russia......
anyone who thinks Ukraine could beat Russia is a fool.
You gotta let people speak Bill. You spoke for 2 mins straight 😆
Well, all Bill cares is, how he sounds.
Well, the clip did get cut off early. Perhaps the conversation went much longer.
It didn't dawn on you that this was just the beginning of a much longer segment? LOL
And all he did with that time is demonstrate his profound ignorance on the issue.
FACT 1: The USA spent $7 TRILLION that's $7,000,000,000,000) in Iraq and Afghanistan wars and LOST BOTH! Yet you expect to beat Russia, how crazy are these people?🤣🤣🤣
Since Biden took office, there seem to have been more unfavorable results in America likewise Canada.
These results include effects on the markets, such as price declines and sharp increases in inflation, as well as bank failures. I wonder if the sudden increase in interest rates will help value investors or if it would be wiser to stay away from the stock and financial markets for the time being.
I truly enjoy having a portfolio coach to help me make market judgments on a daily basis. They possess a special combination of abilities that enable them to take both long and short positions, benefiting from the possibility of significant gains while also safeguarding against downward turns. Additionally, they have access to exclusive knowledge and research that virtually guarantees they will outperform. I've had a portfolio coach for more than two years, and throughout that time l've actually earned over $432k. It was a wonderful experience!
This is exactly how i wish to get my finances coordinated ahead of retirement. Can I get access to your advisor?
In fact, I'm not sure whether I'm permitted to say this, but l'd suggest searching for Samuel Peter Descovich as he gained a lot of attention in 2020. He is both my coach and the manager of my portfolio.
This information is valuable. I quickly searched his full name and his website appeared instantly, showcasing his impressive qualifications. Thank you for sharing.
That's why I've entrusted a fiduciary with my investment decisions. Many underestimate advisors until emotions lead to losses. My fiduciary crafted a tailored strategy aligning with my long-term goals, guiding entry and exit points for the equities I focus on. This has grown my portfolio to $700k, generating sufficient dividends for my household's needs.
You do realize that everything they say about this war, they said about the Vietnam war.
NO WAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I remember!
Big difference... we were losing thousands of lives in Vietnam... here just money.
Ukraine is Russia's Vietnam. What are "they" saying about the Ukraine war in Russia?
The whole western world supports Ukraine, In Vietnam it was only USA.
Refresh my memory. Did we have troops in Vietnam? How about Ukraine?
RUCK FUSSIA
yeah well Russia smoked your team
so who got effed here? LOL
You sound bitter that Russia won LOL
As long as it takes.
How's the weather in Kiev, keyboard warrior?
@@cc8751 How's the weather in Hell, ruzzian meat?
Stop funding them now, and take back all of our armaments.
How long should US support Israel?
Exactly. Let the jews support themselves
Exactly.
Ukraine at least is fighting a very important geoestrategic war against a clear enemy/danger against the West & the US. Israel, on the other hand, it’s simply massacrating a population of incredibly poor sheperds and children. Their constant wars in the Middle East serve no purpose except for themselves, it’s a constant source of inestability and tensions that greatly affects negatively the rest of the world, but somehow they have this blind & eternal suport from the USA no matter what.
Force Israel to give back to the palestinians most of their land and let them create a state in which Israel has nothing to do and nothing to say about it. Share Jerusalem and stop giving money and blind support to the state of Israel.
@@demri123 I disagree with that, but I would balance that out with making the Israelis walk back legislation that allows it commit war crimes: The bill that decriminalizes the IDF killing non-combatants (particularly women and children). Without this, the IDF and the Israeli government are no better than HAMAS.
america just vetoed a un security council resolution for a cease fire in Gaza. americas support is unwavering, which means more trouble for the US. Theyre such a bunch of clowns
WAKE UP. ITS CALLED GENOCIDE
As a person living in Poland: Please don’t stop helping. Russia won’t stop. Trust me.
Oh, they'll stop. Maybe on the Rhine, maybe on the Seine, maybe on the Atlantic Ocean, it's hard to say. That's the problem for Americans, there's not much chance of it ever _directly_ coming to the US, so some people don't take it seriously as a threat, but they fail to realize how crucial a free Europe is to everyone's security including our own.
We are not the world police. Take care of your own country.
@@jryanw1159If your neighbor was being robbed, raped or murdered would you do nothing?
I can’t stop myself from pointing out that petty squabbles such as Poland’s with Ukraine over grain don’t help convince Americans that Europe is doing all it can and we need to keep helping.
@ericmichels6158 If Ukraine is our neighbor, then pretty much every country is. Europe has to be able to defend itself. And in fact, they can, we just don't offer incentive to when we send so much money.
I'd be willing to come to Canada's or Mexico's aid if they were invaded because they are our actual neighbors. If they fell to some foreign power hostile to the U.S., those would make an actual ground invasion of the U.S. somewhat more possible.
The sheer number of guns in the U.S. alone makes any proper land invasion a difficult proposition. Indeed, the U.S. greatest threats come from nuclear ICBM armed countries and from within.
Most great countries / empires fall only when internal conditions allow it. As much as I support Ukraine's right to defend itself and am rooting for them, I will not vote for any politician who supports further aid until they stop ignoring problems here at home.
Do people not realize that Bill Maher is kind of clueless about a lot of things?
I realized this a long time ago, thank you for saying it
It's all part of the show
There is no reason for the US to be involved. None. Bring back the Monroe doctrine.
1:12 Bill, do you have early-onset dementia? What the "stalemate" ?
I'm so glad to hear them say that. I was ready to be angry. We can print 100 billion dollars if it means standing up for the west instead of postponing the day we have to send soldiers.
Bidenomics has infected your brain. Money printer go brrrrrr.
And the Ukrainians get to be the sacrificial pawns in our forever proxy war? How noble of us
It’s also far cheaper to have universal healthcare and allow negotiation of prescription drug prices than to force people to put off medical care until it’s serious…but we never have enough money for that 🤦🏽♂️
true. the US can afford both things. it is not like Ukraine is the reason why the US didn't have universal healthcare system before the war.
That is a political issue, not a money issue. Negotiating drug prices will be cheaper, not more expensive.
Maybe. If the money incentive isnt there
. The innovation could be less. Or at least that is the argument
As you said, universal healthcare is cheaper than the existing system. The barrier is political will, not a lack of money.
I wish you Americans had universal healthcare and better medication prices. I pay $7 a prescription here in Australia.
We need more and longer discussions like this, on this topic and others. Thank you Bill Mayer.
This show would be so much better without all those clapping seals in the audience.
Witty hut 100% accurate. Also USA is not alone in funding and supplying weapons to Ukraine.
No just about 90 percent of it
Those people are automatons. They couldn't have an original thought to save their life. They wouldn't dare to say Victoria Nuland's name out loud. Complete cowards. Painting a picture of history that is ahistorical. For decades we promised Russia we would not move a foot East of Berlin. We broke that every chance we got until Putin saw the threat of losing Sebastopol and acted. We forced his hand and if anyone would like learn who Victoria Nuland is and how she played a major role in starting this war you'd immediately be a more honest human being than either of these two so called journalists.
Plus a lot of what we are sending there are weapons due to be decommissioned and already replaced by newer better models. The main reason we decided to send cluster munitions is because we had boatloads of them that have reached the end of their shelf life. If you want precision strikes you need to have good shells with known and stable charges or they are going to fall short or just be inaccurate. That's why Russia has to shoot 20 shells to get just one to hit while Ukraine is much more accurate. Russia is scraping the bottom of the barrel and you can bet the shells they get from North Korea aren't in their prime. Not here in the US we constantly replace old stock with new stock, old vehicle and weapons with new and better models. Plus a lot of the cost is on paper because unlike real business in the real world the Military doesn't get to depreciate the costs, that 30 year old $10 million tank is simply not worth $10 million anymore but when we figure aid it's the new cost not the depreciated cost. Not to mention it is just cheaper to give Ukraine Bradleys and Humvees and shells than it is to pay to decommission and scrap them safely
@@RJT80 Of course because Eastern Europe were afraid of Russian expansion which happened before. The Eastern Europeans wanted to join NATO.
@@Goawaykidyoubotherme As a percentage of our military budget and GDP there are several countries doing more in comparison. For instance Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, and Bulgaria have all given 2 to 3 times more as a percentage of their GDP than the US has. I'm pretty sure the same can be said about Great Britain who has been unwavering in their support despite the political stability at home
I feel like they didn't answer his question. He asked if it was a winnable war. He didn't ask if it was the right thing to do. And that's what they turned it into, the whys of supporting Ukraine. And if it's not winnable, it doesn't mean we have to give up, it could mean a change in strategy to make it winnable. But to turn it into moral is to just ignore the fact that currently, Ukraine is not winning and not have to face the tough questions of what to do.
ukraine is not winning because they dont get the right weapons and not enough weapons, tanks, air defense, they should have 50 patriot systems by now not 5 ... they need air superiority! you cant amass trops without air superiority cause the enemy artillery and glide bombs will just destroy your whole army! so its skirmish mode for ukraine with which you wont get much land, so the west gets basically what they paid for …
Whilst it will take time, the US and its' allies need to increase weapons production and increase support to Ukraine. Whilst the front may be at a standstill, the war isn't. The war is wearing down Russia as well as Ukraine, and compared to Iraq ($1.9T) and Afghanistan ($2.3T), $111B so far should be considered good value to the US and its' allies.
They're not generals...The US lost Vietnam because TV celebrities were taken seriously
The answer is of course it is winnable, Ukraine had already liberated about 50% of the occupied territories since 2022.
@@someone6170 First I'm not worried about money, nor wearing down Russia. I said is the war winnable for Ukraine. One can still lose a war that's a good deal in price compared to other wars. One can lose a war and wear down your opponent. The question I asked is if the war is winnable for Ukraine.
It's great to see a great diversity of opinions on Bill Maher instead of the usual warmongering propagandists.
It must be hard being this braindead
Imagine you are beaten by English nationalist in Scotland if you utter scottish/galeic words or put/pin/hold scottish flag. That is what happened with Hungarians living in west ukraine (who were cut from their mother country in 1920 by Treaty of Trianon). I live 50 miles form Ukraine border and we know. there is even a law, you can check, which forbids in school to use your own language in school. If you use/pin/waive Hungarian flag there you are beaten until you bleed. Same applies for Russians there. But you in the west media bubble do not hear these. The Minsk agreement was to assure these rights but Ukraine ignored it with the support of the west.
Zelensky has a multi million euro palace in Tuscana, Italy, he has had it even before he became president. Where do you think that money came from? His wealth is estimated 1,5 billion USD. Ukraine is one of the most corrupt countries in the world and is far from being a democracy
Russia cannot be beaten only talks give peace but USA does not want it. Even if Ukraine wins back all territories, what is guarantee Russia will not go back some months later? Nothing.
Ukraine is in ruins, the economy is bankrupted, the people fled, those who stayed are in life lasting war shock. The war does not seem to end soon. There is no winner in this.
The solution is to respect the concern of Russia and for Ukraine to respect minority rights.
The beneficiaries of the war are USA and China. USA gas 4x more expensive than Russian, makes EU/Germany uncompetitive, end of EU economy. EU/UK will crush due to incompetent leaders who think a long term stable peace and prosperity in Europe is possible without or by "beating" Russia (whatever it means) and a strong European/German economy based on cheap Russian gas scares the hell out of the USA. Prospect of Ukraine joining NATO, NATO expansion and the oppression of minorities in ukraine led to this. This is the west paying the cost of freedom. the west decided to pay the »cost of freedom«, so pin the ukrainian flag onto your shirt and enjoy the western style of living while it lasts.
Russia could end the war today by going back to Russia. The solution is for the Russian people to get rid of Putin, since the elections are fake somebody needs to do like Prigozhin, but succeed.
When should we start supporting our own people!
WE DO!!
Like how the GQP support women and allow them to have control over their own bodies
You’ll just spend it on drugs and booze.
Ukraine wasn't the reason why the US doesn't do that. that was happening before and it will keep happening after. And to some extend the US does that but not in a functional way.
Just because we support Ukraine, does not mean we don't support ourselves. You have a scarcity mindset that is present in a lot of unsuccessful people
Putin running for president again. So I’m assuming he’s not giving up, and the US shouldn’t either
1999 ...Putin was a shoo-in by Yeltsin ...for a 4 year term... 2 x term limit as per the US .. Putin is Running in March 2024 which could theoretically see Putin in power until 2036... 39 years in power off a 4 year / 2 term base..
That is the basis for the Trump blueprint currently being used by Miller et al...
“Running for president”
it's not the "US's" war, so no, we need to stop the Biden money laundering scheme to the military industrial complex and all the associated cronies around it from stealing tax payer dollars for their own personal wealth.
@@gadfanad I get it but he always could have retired, turned the day to day over to a toady
@@AdamYoudell He did that back in 2008 with Dmitry Medvedev. It seems he didn't care for it, so he took back over. Like most dictators, I assume that he's not a big fan of sharing power or stature.
If Ukraine got 70,000 dead, then can someone explain to me why the average age of their force is 43, as well, why are they grabbing people off the street to serve in the Ukraine force? Your numbers are incorrect my good sir.
We should stop helping Ukraine and Israel And take care of our own people.
how long do "we" fight... I don't recall a single american solider in Ukraine! It's not we... it's Ukraine vs. our sworn enemy!
Yes and with Western help Ukraine has degraded pootins military and shown how inept they are
Our sworn enemy??? Ok, James Bond 😂
@@philster6383 LMAO Russia has the largest amount of nuclear warheads. You can't be that dumb to believe Ukraine was EVER going to win. LOL WOW how foolish are you, Phil!
The cold War has been over for years...
Let's count the number of sworn enemies... Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, Iraq... none of which are even in the same continent.
Are they really a real threat or a made up fictional enemy to justify more military spending?
How is Russia our sworn enemy? Russia has some chance of actually being allied with the West (small, but greater than China). We just keep pushing Russia further and further into an alliance with China instead.
We are horrible at negotiating and doing anything militarily that doesn't just exacerbate the situation. We should never have made any agreements with Ukraine, we should not have led them into believing entering NATO would ever be an option, and so forth. If we just stayed out of things, they'd likely have more positive outcome.
At any rate, I frankly don't care what agreements former U.S. leaders made in the past, I don't owe anyone a vote based on that. I will not vote for anyone that promises more aid to Ukraine without a specific end term, and certainly won't vote for anyone that says they will put troops on the ground.
Should have been titled 'an advert for the military industrial complex.'
Americans sure don't need an advertisement for that. It's not a product anymore. it's a lifestyle.
yeah, lets fight the industrial military complex and lets live like Hippies while we let Putin take what he wants. That strategy just worked fine with good old Adolf. He wanted the Sudetenland, lets give it to him, he wanted Austria, lets give it to him, then he wanted Poland and 60 million deaths later one acknowledged that it would have been cheaper and would have saved millions of lives if we stopped him early.
Its a meat grinder
It would be less of a stalemate if the west would properly supply Ukraine instead of drip feeding them.
A few hundred billion go sell everything you own and send it over there if you care so much.
How else to launder MI-Complex grift.
It’s not even a stalemate though, Ukraine is losing.
@@ericp1139yes... Russias winning so hard they had to do a draft. lulz.
110 billion from the US alone isn't enough?
…the better question should be how long should Israel be supported. FWIW
I think the question about how long should we support our allies will vary from person to person. But the answer is... We will support our allies for as long as the ones that are in control determine we will.
@@shaneelliott6658 fair. Collectively then the true answer is that the voters will decide. However, we all don’t start with the same understanding of things.
We should support neither. We are $34 trillion in debt.
The question is how much you can afford till you are bankrupt? Israel has tons of money and they're still getting financial aid.
0% of Palestinians polled had a favourable view of America. Israel had one of the highest rates in the world of pro-US opinion. Palestinians support the death penalty for converting to Christianity. It's an absolute no-brainer for Americans to support Israel. Just as much as supporting South Korea against North Korea.
I love Bill but my god is he out of touch on Ukraine.
He is 100% correct
Learn history, you might understand why we need to continue helping, unless you want us to get involved in the war and then the money increases ten fold...it is funny hearing so many fools saying no more money for Ukraine, since they never learned their history.@@cc8751
No more words Just see and dream peace forever ...
It's funny how routinely the only point of agreement from a senior CNN correspondent and the RNC is the perpetual need for the American machine to grow and conquer.
The only war machine currently active is Putin's army....if our war machine was on the move...you would know it. Putin's orks would be knocked back to MOscow by now if Ukraine had the military capability the USA has.
grow and conquer is what Putin wants, the US is just helping people who desperately try to save their lives and homes against a power hungry dictator and are meanwhile saving the West.
how the hell do you get that out of what they said?
face the facts, the only person today with a need to grow and conquer is indisputably Putin.
What the last guy said is VERY true. In hindsight, France could have beaten Germany (1938) after they just taken over the Sudetenland from Czech. But because France and UK let Hitler just take the vast industralized Sudetenland which increased tank production... they gave Europe on a silver platter to Hitler, sparking WW2. The lesson: whenever you can stop aggression, you must! If not for the benefit of mankind, do it for your own economy in the long-term...
I get the logic in your statement. The problem becomes for how long before the funders of a war become the fighters of the war and thus convincing your people that it's worth sacrificing your sons, and in some case daughters, to die for their country but not really their country.
@@Maria_Nizhny_Novgorod Does working at a Russian troll factory pay well? Well enough to buy nice American things? :)
@@Maria_Nizhny_Novgorod
How's the weather in Moscow today?
And, does putin's 🐓 taste like 🐔 ?
I could argue Hitler would never have come to power if not for the oppressive Versailles treaty. France and Germany would have come to a much fairer treaty due to the stalemate if the USA had not intervened in WWI. That would have avoided 10s of millions of deaths. So the lesson: avoid entangling alliances and keep out of others business.
@@jp1135 Even further than that, WW1 wouldn't have started were it not for all the entangling alliances formed after the last great war before that, the Crimean war, was it? History and all that rhyming...
What about Congress cutting Veteran's pay for disabilities we are already suffering from. "Support the Troops" my ass.
The house has a majority that is Republican.,Perhaps we should ask them to stand up for veterans.
@@gregtarris9057Democrat and republican are all controlled by the same people
Get two people who agree on funding to say they agree on funding...because we can't give a platform to those against it, they are russian puppets
I am a Democrat and I am ok with linking Ukraine funds with border funds
If it takes time wind out of the blowhard Republican voices why not do more? Look at the noise Trump made over virtually nothing and still many people believe he built that wall.
YES true but the GQP are all talk and no action
@@philster6383 The GOP is ready to sell out Ukraine and sees democracy as an annoyance in todays Trump world.
It's not that simple because the Democrats already offered more border funds. The GOP wants that plus a complete overhaul of asylum rules.
Except the gop will attach something absurd like putting kids in cages again or starting up that stupid ass wall that didn't absolutely nothing
The US promised to protect Ukraine from Russia in order to get them to relinquish the nuclear weapons remaining in Ukraine after the breakup of the Soviet Union. Won't be a surprise if the US goes back on their promise as it is SOP for them.
The US government promised to uphold the Constitution. Government officials are sworn in promising that. They've managed to thoroughly violate the Constitution. Promises don't mean anything.
I wish there were more references to this. The UK and the USA guarantees Ukrainian sovereignty when they VOLUNTARILY gave up their enormous arsenal of nuclear weapons. Putin wouldn’t have taken any parts of the country had Ukraine kept their weapons. The US’s credibility used to mean something and this is just like the betrayal of the Kurds or Afghans who assisted the US military. We toss people overboard when they no longer serve us which is no way to maintain moral or any other kind of authority in the long run game of geopolitics.
Great point. For America to ask the Ukrainians to give up their nuclear weapons, and to then back away from supporting them when they are attacked, would be evil in itself and would send a dreadful message to both allies and foes.
@@ALFarrell-kv6ok You two know that Russia promised to behave in that treaty too, right? All that to say, I agree with you both as far as the US is concerned. No time for playing around.
@@gadfanad They did. Really it's Ukraine that's been fucked the most here, which is why they need to be supported - among many other reasons.
Damn, this missus might be a part of the DS 😂 she straight up saying "we need to conquer the earth before putin does"
We do not have the luxury to sit this one out like we did in the 1930’s. From 1938 to 1945 Hitler and the Nazi’s invaded and occupied 20 countries. Putin would surly go into Poland after Ukraine.
The main difference in the war in Ukraine is that the Ukrainians are motivated to fight it without our help (not win it, at least in the near future). There's no arm twisting, no winning hearts and minds. In Afghanistan starting 2005, the rural areas were never on the US side. The police and army were only in it for the money, as soon as it got dangerous they bailed and collapsed in weeks. The tragedy is Urkraine could have taken much more territory and be in a firm negotiating position if we had gone all in and fully equipped them with ATACAMS from the beginning. As it is, it's not real money, it's simply accounting, assets moving from "we gotta pay for retirement and destruction column" to "hey, these guys could use it, let's give it to Ukraine!" column. More "We are redecorating, why don't we give last years new furniture to Goodwill so somebody who needs it can use almost new stuff" From a cold hearted asset value view, we are getting so much information out of use, tactics, etc. that it more than pays for itself. It's like signing up for the customer card at the grocery store, they used to have to pay for surveys, now they see in real time the demographics of who is using what, so they get the information for free, even with a discount or whatever they are more than making the money back in selling what people want to buy.
And most of the money "given" to Ukraine is spent in the US.
But the intelligence haul from this war is going to save American lives if shit gets hot with China.
The most important reason though is IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO. Which is why the Republicans don't want to do it. Traitors.
They simply do not have the hardware necessary because Europe and the USA have been sandbagging aid the entire time. Ideally Ukraine should have 4 fighter wings of mixed fighter /bomber aircraft, ability to run night ops, about 100 more HIMARS with thousands of ATACAMS, and cluster munitions. We have defense contractors that can make a cluster airburst munition that is lethal in a circular radius greater than 2 football fields
Thanx for putting it simply enough so the 3rd grade mentalities that don’t understand have a chance to grasp the reality of the situation. Very good reply!
IF you want more funding for ukraine, you go fight there
It's a money laundering scheme.
US has been support Isreal for 6 decade, so another decade for Ukraine is no big deal.
How long should the US have Lend/Lease to Russia then? Maybe Russia needs to pay back the US for those weapons they needed in WW2.
Pay me now or pay me later, just like the mechanic would say.
2:46
You should punish aggression, but you should not conflate "failure to punish" something with "rewarding" it. The distinction between reward and the absence of punishment is a staple of behavioral management and those who conflate them should not be snowcloning the language of behavioral management in the first place.
It may seem a trivial point, but that kind of misuse of words makes me wonder about his agenda, even if I otherwise agree with his point. :/
The problem is that Putin spins everything as victory. So the use of the word "reward" is fitting. What's unforgivable is using the word "stalemate" or "frozen". We are nowhere near seeing the violence stop. US support to Ukraine has trickled down to the lowest point over the past 2 months. It's also been the highest casualty count of Russian troops for the last 2 months. And if Ukraines 3 to 1 estimate of their own casualties are accurate, then it's been a blood bath. If Putin isn't stopped then it sends a message to Xi, Hamas, the Iranian regime, & Trump that we're ok with their world view of everybody starting wars with their neighbours without consequence. Syria, Ukraine, Armenia. They're all victims of Putin's "Multipolar" world order. And we have to acknowledge that support Ukraine or not, the violence won't stop unless Putin is 6 feet under and rotting in hell.
The Ukrainian war is not a stalemate. If we would have given what they needed along with the training sooner this would have been over. Even more if the world didn’t turn a blind eye when Russia invaded Crimea. Things should have been stopped then.
Very true. Wish all Republicans were on board
Russia won it done
It is a stalemate, if not what is it?
Russia or Putin are murderers who invade another country and plant their flag on the rubble and dead bodies they created@@HellYeah.McKracken
Ukraine will never defeat Russia...
He would never be this 'mehh' about supporting Israel
Well said. I like Bill since he is a Common Sense man without an agenda.
This is a Neville Chamberlain moment.
I'm from Czech republic, trust me, Putin won't stop. In 2-3 years the conflict will restart (he'll find himself a reason).
And Russia will have a much more prepared army and much bigger military industrial complex.
I understand that it's expensive for the US to send money - *so don't* only send old military equipment.
It costs more to de-militarize it in US, that to send it to UA. And there are LOT'S of that.
US can easily *decrease* the money aid, I think Europeans can handle that part - but *keep sending weapons*
EU is building out it's military production as fast as we can, but can't be done over night.
Here's the issue as an American. It's not about the money, it's about is this war winnable for Ukraine? If not, then there needs to be a change in strategy to enable Ukraine to win. Saying it's a Chamberlain moment or Putin will go further if the West abandons Ukraine doesn't at all answer the question, is the war winnable for Ukraine.
The current strategy has resulted in a stalemate. A change in strategy is not just sending more weapons. That is the strategy right now, sending more and more advanced weapons. Soon they will have F-16s which is going to be a "game changer" And a few months from then, people will forget about it being a game changer like the other weapons that came before it like tanks and other missiles and stuff. Yes Ukraine obviously needs weapons to fight the war but no one wants to talk about the strategy, they want to wax on about the morality of supporting Ukraine to avoid talking about if the strategy is working and if we need a rethink. The top Ukrainian general already said in US media that even if Ukraine got every weapons they needed from the West, they wouldn't have enough soldiers. I mean, with that information, that suggest there needs to be a new strategy, not just continue the current one. But making a new strategy requires tough conversations, so people would rather just say, we have to support Ukraine for as long as it takes and kick the can down the road.
No.
You are full of it. The Russian army is barely able to conquer the Eastern part of Ukraine which is Russian speaking. You are buying the propaganda that wants us to give billions to the arms industry to save us from the bad Russians. Grow up and face the facts. Every warmonger is lusting after money.
Ungrateful Europeans aren't our problem
And Bill contradicted himself, he wants to take the pressure off the Russians because they won't attack a NATO country, but also thinks that Trump will pull out of NATO if he gets elected, which means Russia will attack then:)
As long as it takes. Alas, that's a concept every Russian and Ukrainian understands but few Americans still do.
American is broke, my man.
Because Ukraine is not the US. We are not the world's police.
But it seems other Americans disagree with that.
😂😂😂 Americans spent trillions of dollars and untold lives on the Iraq war, where the opponent was not a real threat, but they don’t want to spend a fraction of that money to counter Putin, who has been waging asymmetrical warfare on them for ten years. Americans are so stupid.
@@userofplatform Well, you're not policing shit in Ukraine. You're SUPPORTING Ukraine defend their freedom and their democracy. Putin ATTACKED Ukraine for no good reason and he BLAMES the US for it. So if you don't want Poland and Germany to be next, you better help Ukraine stop Putin's ambitions to conquer ALL OF the USSR's realm...including East Germany. If Putin wins in Ukraine and then decides that Poland is next, YOU WILL HAVE TO SEND TROOPS, because Poland is YOUR FREAKING NATO ALLY! So you can keep supporting Ukraine, just like Poland does and Germany and France and the UK and the Netherlands, etc., etc., so they will put an end to Putin's dreams of Russia conquering all of Europe....OR...you will HAVE to face world war III.
I agree that it is not totally an Ukrainians fight, it is a fight between Russia and NATO. I thought that we are out of Cold War mentality at this point, but I was wrong.
2 new counties have joined NATO since Putin the clown invaded Ukraine.
I always thought a good joint would open your mind a little, Bill go back to your weed supplier and get a refund...it ain't working...Ukraine has lost upto 500,000 and Russia upto 100,000 and that's not taking into consideration the severely injured on both sides...
How wrong can you be about a war, omg lol
The war is like two nations sat at a blackjack table, the house (military industrial complex) always wins, allies are placing side bets, and this either ends with an asymmetrical draw or someone zero’s out first with no one willing to buy back in on their behalf.
Why would Ukraine need any support? It's winning since 2014 BC.
Not one minute. We started this fight, we escalated it, and we are responsible. The US helped overthrow the leader of the Ukraine back in 2014. The US pushed forcing them to join NATO, despite that being a red line Russia CANNOT let happen (for the same reason we cannot let Canada or Mexico join BRICKS or something similar), and the US has blocked every attempt at peace in the region because millions of Ukrainian people dying is good for lobbyists and the ultra wealthy.
Stalemate occurs on a chess board game. In reality that doesn’t happen and reducing the situation to a “stalemate” is stupid
Do you like poetry?
❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤ stalemate ? every day people die , stuff gets broken
Stalemate is when Ukraine captures all territories russia got since last year.
@@xpact83 ❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️ correcto
Its at a stalemate because the allies were dragging there feet on tanks and long range missiles. Scalps were sent mid May, Storm shadows in July, and ATACMS in August. The fighter jets are still not there. All too late for the spring counteroffensive.
no it is not stalemate, you just hear that in the western media. Actually Ukraine is dying. I live 50 miles from the border. We know.
@@tokajileo5928truth
It is pathetic the west has such capabilities to help Ukraine, but instead doing so little. I believe the west and NATO could win this war any moment, but for unkown reason they are letting Ukraine to bleed
@@papartiska… why is it American responsibility to bail out Ukraine? Europe and Asia are right there, what have they done to assist? We gave over $100B to help a corrupt government and leader Zelensky, and have had ZERO accountability for where all that money went. This isn’t our war, it’s Ukraine’s.
@@chrisrogers5974 I don't know maybe if America and the west won't defend it's interest maybe nobody will. If you like you can wait untill putin invade NATO, then it will cost much more. It's up to you. You want to pay much more it's your choise
I say we divert all the funds to next years little buff boys competition
The sad fact is that most wars in history have resulted in lost territory. The conduct of the USA in wars has deluded people into thinking otherwise.
Maybe if you gave them proper weapons and not scrap.... just maybe. Also, technically, you're not supporting them anymore, aid was blocked.
strictly speaking it's the 2024 allocation that's blocked. The 2023 allocation is still ongoing, another tranche was sent recently and there are still billions in that bucket.
True, it is laughable that we finally agreed to send them tanks, so we gave them 30 tanks, while we have 1,500 tanks sitting in the Nevada desert for over a decade, doing nothing.
@@robertirvine6307 It's almost like winning was never intended. Never ending war however, now that's where the US excel.
@@Heydd00it’s nice to see one person here knows the money making game going on
Bill is coming off as kind of ignorant here. Just because there's no instant gratification here doesn't mean that it's not worthwhile.
Coming off as ignorant _here_ ?
Bill Maher has been a Zionist; even in his golden years. It has always been a bad look for him.
Usa cant figure out its own shit..nevermind others
@@YouAreStillNotablaze😂😂😂😂
Bills being a realist
I would agree that Putin will not stop until NATO is sufficiently far enough away from his borders. But can someone explain to me how would he invade eastern Europe if he cannot advance in Ukraine anymore?
Can someone else also explain to me how does Ukraine remove Russia from the territory they have gained since Ukraine is losing manpower?
this has less to do with NATO on his borders than imperialistic desire of reconstituting the old empire. NATO Baltic states have lived peacefully on Russias border for 30 years now, Putin is not threatened by NATO
This is now a frozen conflict at existing front along the Dnipro and north to Belarus border. both sides have discovered how difficult it is to breach existing lines without air superiority. The problem for Putin is all of the Ukrainian territory he now holds, from the Kerch bridge to Kharkiv, is reachable with Western missiles and drones. Sevastopol is no longer a viable sea port for Russia’s Black Sea navy. The Kerch bridge may not be long for this world. So even though Russia can hold territory, at some point it comes at greater cost than its worth
@ClownCarCoup i disagree, it is almost entirely NATO encroaching on Russia's doorstep. The imperial regime excuse is old and tired out.
It's a boogie man argument pushed by main stream media.
Your questions can not be answered because it will not happen. Putin has zero desire to take more of Ukraine, much less western Europe (not Eastern like you said). He nor Russia have never postured in any way that suggests that that is the goal. Why you believe that is beyond me
@@Benny-zo3qh According to the United Nations definition, countries within _Eastern_ Europe are Belarus, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, *Moldova,* Poland, Romania, Slovakia, *Ukraine,* and the western part of the Russian Federation.
We know Russia has been attempting to control/influence Ukraine since 2014. Russia has been attempting control Moldova via Transnistria for even longer. Putin has said himself he’d like to reconstitute former Soviet/Warsaw pact empire in some fashion, which includes Eastern Europe. Anyone paying attention knows this
@ClownCarCoup For the purposes of what we're talking about and practically speaking, NATO is the west.
An American backed coup took over Ukraine in 2014, so I'm not sure what Russian control you're referring to. They (Ukraine) were killing ethnic Russians in the Donbas, and Putin wanted to stop it, hense why they had the Minsk agreement, which was violated by Ukraine with the help of America.
With regards to the reconstruction of the Soviet Union
Putin said: "The USSR is no more. We can't bring the past back. And Russia doesn't need it anymore. We are not striving towards that."
I could go on for days and post FULL quotes that clearly point out that it's not his aim to bring back the USSR. If you only listen to clips and pieces from Western mainstream media, then yes, of course, he wants to bring it back, and yes, of course, he will invade NATO.
What the f*** The conversation just started getting good and you cut the video off
“We’re still having fights over territory and armies.” That’s literally what war is, Bill.
Bill isn't too smart for a "Grandpa Karin"
The point he is trying to make is war in this day and age isn't necessary. In the past, country's invaded for land, resources or enslavement of people. With the modern-day technology, no one needs more land. Also now wars are fought as far away from each other as possible. Conventional war will be extinct soon, it will all be terrorism and gorilla warfare. Not army vs army on a battlefield.
This one is about greed, hatred and ego of putin. He thinks himself a king and is all about his legacy and he needs to win or keep it going.
Bill came across as very ill informed on this topic. Super short sighted.
This topic? I mean..... 😅When is he not? He's a reactionary pretending to be an actual comedian, he is always short sighted. The only utility his show provides is if he has informed panelists on(but even that is less common these days, unfortunately) personally I've always seen him as an idiot who sometimes has smart people on, which can be entertaining and useful if the writers decide to put some decent talking points and questions in the show)
No money for Ukraine! 👎🏻
As long as America profits from it 🙄
Im calling BS on their statements
Wasted 20 years in Afghanistan, 2 trillion dollars. Another 20 years in Vietnam, probably another trillion in today's dollars. Give them what then need, quite prolonging the war by holding back equipment, and let Ukraine win it and move on.
YES!
Why? Is their war, let them fight it who cares.
This war is designed to last as long as possible by the military industrial complex.
Guests are delusional.
This is only a portion of their debate on Ukraine. Definitely view the full panel portion of this episode if you can. Interesting, thought-provoking comments all around, even more than usual in my opinion. Especially great to have a long-experienced international war correspondent such as Jane on the show and at this time.
jane is lying and she knows it
Link pls? Thanks
@@foxtrotunit1269 HBO
The only thing thought provoking about this conversation was how seemingly smart people can have such an unintellectual take on the Ukraine war. If you were impressed by this, well then, you're easily impressed...
chasing shadows . That was Bush's murder of Iraq for US 'interests '
These 2 love wars so much yet won't pick up a rifle and go to the front lines. Strange that.