EU seeks to raise 15 billion euros for Ukraine from Russia's frozen assets
EU seeks to raise 15 billion euros for Ukraine from Russia's frozen assets: Report
I'm honestly shocked they haven't been doing it already, not like any good faith intention can be had at this point of resuming business with Moscow in the wake of things save for a MASSIVE change in the Russian geopolitical psyche.
Seize it all.
Lets build a wall and let the Russians pay for it.
Europe should be is technically footing the lion's share of this deal but individual NATO members in Europe have [still] not universally met their 2%/GDP/annum committments rsspectively
For this reason, I believe more can be done on their side of the ocean in Brussels before we allow the suggestion that Washington DC internal politics should have any relevance as to whether Ukraine receives enough and sufficiently consistent provision of such funding than has been portrayed to be the case by Ukraine (via Zelensky) itself.
Consequently, I would ask the tangential but prescient question:
Why is the US even necessary for this convo in light of that and outside of the targeted provision of superior millitary equipment that only they can specifically address?
Edit: congratualtions, you've downvoted facts. That makes you smart, well-done ;)
I got one for ya no one's touched yet!
America gets to ship her old(ish) gear and arms to Ukraine and see it battle tested in a massive land war vs. our arch enemy. And keep in mind, we're talking about materiel that's already paid for and the replacements are already in the budget.
We're getting to explore new battlefield tactics, see our enemy play his cards, gather insane amounts of intelligence, etc. It's a no-brainer for NATO.
Oh, don't get me wrong, America is totally triple if not quadruple dipping and leveraging the shit out of this whole situation in the way only they can, and yes, they are def playing 6-D chess here, but that doesn't technically invalidate anything I've said thus far.
There's still a $-value to all that and the fact remains that several if not many individual NATO members have not met and continue to fail to meet their obligations.
I believe I can paraphrase someone as having argued "well, 10 EU nations ARE, so checkmate!" and its like, how many members of the EU ARE NOT and why is that allowed to consistently stand, unaddressed?
And how exactly is it unreasonable to use that as a benchmark to guide how much further Europe gives to close that gap before we all throw our hands up and resign ourselves to the notion that if the US House stifles the effort, why do we really give a fuck? Europe can just bridge the gap and if the US can get its shit together, than thats just gravy (sufficiently nice but not necessary)
US has made security everywhere it's job, so they care about stability in Europe as much as Europe does. Degrading Russian capacity means less military investment into Europe is necessary to keep things stable. Plus, the US is mostly giving stuff that they were throwing away anyway, so the cost is much much less than the sticker price commonly sited.
Because countering Russia has been the US' primary offer in all deals and bargaining for the last 50 years?
That should have been a more universal position, why had Europe been screwing around with Russia all this time till now? Why was Germany so stupid to be relying on Russia in terms of energy dependance, why anybody rely on Russia for anything when they've proven themselves to be unreliable, violent, slimeballs full of stupid Chinese riddle-threats and nothing actually interesting or productive to say, like ever?
Why is the US even necessary for this convo
Cold War got more complicated, economies got more complicated, US defense is somewhat materially dependent on various regions, including Europe.
Also, NATO exists and depends on US engagement.
I just mean, theres all this drama about what if the Congressional Republicans screw Ukraine, and its like, the EU's GDP is way higher and the US is always complaining about them shirking their 2% committments they all agreed to. Why not get everyone paid up towards this effort, especially since its in their own side yard?
If the US fails to get it done, Europe and the rest of NATO need to step up and do the right thing. It shouldn't matter if the US gets bogged down in its own ridiculous internal politics, Europe needs to stop playing poor and open their very dusty checkbooks, including fucking Hungary and Turkey (but i'm not that naïve)
Downvote away, thoughful downvoters
Because world security is in the US's best interests. "Two of the world's biggest wheat producers are now at war, driving up food prices because one of them is a dipshit authoritarian who thought that invading other countries like some interwar fascist twat was viable" is not something that the US likes to hear - at least not anyone here with a ounce of fucking sense.
And the EU's since they are geographically far more implicated in the dangers of Russia's frontier and hegemony expanding and all the more directly exposed to the collateral damage of their failure to ensure the success of Ukraine's defensive effort
Who said the US is necessary for it?
That seems to be the part of the soap opera we're all in. Congressional repubs are threatening the abillity to get Ukraine funded/provisioned, unless that's just Biden's admin's rhetoric and they're going to leave the House and/or Courts to enforce clawing back anything they say fuck it and just wire/send over aha
Edit: seriously grow up downvoter lol, double dare you to open a new account and downvote twice cuz you know...your downvotes speak louder than you or I ever could aha #schizo
Edit: here, I'll downvote myself so we're on the same side finally (lol) and give you your stupid wish. Feel better, nothing in the world has changed and my words still dominate yours but yea, you got da widdle downvote [Milton from Office Space voice] ?! Not mad btw, high and superior logically as always, have a good night livin'ur best life lol
Because they instigated the euromaidan?
Sounds good, is there any reason why their assets should not be used to compensate for the damages they are causing?
I'm guessing because a lot of them aren't clearly marked "Russian state war chest part 12", but rather things like "Gazprom reserve fund" or "Oligarchs discretionary fund" which would muddy the border between state and private assets.
State assets might be fine to seize to cover state costs, but the legality of seizing the others' might by grayer.
I'd think that's why they haven't been tapped this far. They're holding out to see if they can hand the Ukrainians something when this shit show is over.
Which is super fucked they're waiting. Probably waited for Hitler to win to congratulate him on doing the dirty work for 'em, t✡️✡️ and c✡️mpen$ate him für sein/der Kampf or waseva
To what extent would that a be a larger question for like Switzerland and other Russian/dirty-money-heavy shelter jurisdictions?
Losers who would also be responsible for the failure that was Reconstruction.