Do they have to broadcast we are shipping them more ammo, missiles, and medical supplies.
This is a very good point. Another poster mentioned Russian assistance to Vietnam, which was extensive. The difference is that they just sent the shit and didn't advertise it.
Bragging about how much and what type of war material we are sending over there just invites the obvious conclusion that it's a de facto declaration of war.
Like we knew they were doing it, they knew we knew they were doing it. But they would have never admitted it. We did this same stuff in WW2 we bragged about arming one side. And I’m glad we did arm that side. But we don’t need to telegraph what we are doing. It’s like giving to charity and then bragging about giving to charity. You didn’t give to help that cause. You gave to get yourself attention. And that’s not a good reason to give to charity.
Well in WWII, Roosevelt was looking for a way to get us into the war. Pearl Harbor threw off his plans, but we were already having US Navy ships sunk by U-boats as they escorted lend-lease materials to England long before Dec 7.
I know. The major difference here is what kind of relation does America have with Ukraine vs the UK. Most Americans share a common ancestry tying them to the UK. Major Ukrainian connection is corrupt politicians make shady businesses deals there.
We gave them billions to keep the Germans fighting a 2 front war.
Best case scenario this continues the Cold War tradition of a proxy war between NATO and Russia. Worst case scenario this echos arming the Allie’s before getting pulled into WW2. And unfortunately. As what’s already been mentioned in this thread, us bragging about this brings the similarities closer to pre WW2 and less Cold War proxy war.
The only reason the Russian army could maneuver during the battle of Stalingrad is because they were driving American made trucks. During WW2 we sent the Soviets over 400,000 trucks and jeeps.
This is a very good point. Another poster mentioned Russian assistance to Vietnam, which was extensive. The difference is that they just sent the shit and didn't advertise it.
Bragging about how much and what type of war material we are sending over there just invites the obvious conclusion that it's a de facto declaration of war.
Like we knew they were doing it, they knew we knew they were doing it. But they would have never admitted it. We did this same stuff in WW2 we bragged about arming one side. And I’m glad we did arm that side. But we don’t need to telegraph what we are doing. It’s like giving to charity and then bragging about giving to charity. You didn’t give to help that cause. You gave to get yourself attention. And that’s not a good reason to give to charity.
Well in WWII, Roosevelt was looking for a way to get us into the war. Pearl Harbor threw off his plans, but we were already having US Navy ships sunk by U-boats as they escorted lend-lease materials to England long before Dec 7.
Which makes this parallel even more concerning.
I know. The major difference here is what kind of relation does America have with Ukraine vs the UK. Most Americans share a common ancestry tying them to the UK. Major Ukrainian connection is corrupt politicians make shady businesses deals there.
We actually gave billions to Russia in WW2. I guess we're even now?
We gave them billions to keep the Germans fighting a 2 front war.
Best case scenario this continues the Cold War tradition of a proxy war between NATO and Russia. Worst case scenario this echos arming the Allie’s before getting pulled into WW2. And unfortunately. As what’s already been mentioned in this thread, us bragging about this brings the similarities closer to pre WW2 and less Cold War proxy war.
The only reason the Russian army could maneuver during the battle of Stalingrad is because they were driving American made trucks. During WW2 we sent the Soviets over 400,000 trucks and jeeps.