This is not the only way and often it is less efficient way. Consider January 6, for example. Trump movement would be much better off it was just non-disruptive peaceful protest.
I think the best pro-Ukraine victory (as opposed to stalemate) argument is that Ukraine gets Western munition, which is higher quality. So single dollar gets more. This at least partly compensates purchasing (in)parity.
Protesting, no. Disrupting, yes.
Protesting civilian casualties, no. Supporting Hamas, yes.
Supporting creation of Palestinian state - no. Supporting destruction of Israeli state (from the reaver to the sea) - yes.
Unfortunately these protests attracts all kind of people, including those with antisemitism tendencies. So, it is not simple yes/no answer.
Ukraine defense spending in 2024 is $40B. It is not easy to find total number from all EU countries, but historically they give significantly less for military spending for Ukraine. There is big 50B package from EU, but it is mostly economical and over 4 years. But let me overestimate and suggest 20B as military aid for Ukraine. All together is $120B and is still less than what Russia spends and it is before accounting for purchasing parity. US, and especially EU countries should significantly increase military help for Ukraine to push back. And while EU countries increased military spending it is just not enough.
The Russia’s military budget is not quite clear, but for 2024 the most cited number I see is $140B. 2.5 times larger than this bill. If we include the fact that purchase parity would adjust this to even larger difference, on can see that at this point of funding Ukraine can think only about maintaining status quo at best.
The fact that you do not even ask such questions, shows that you are narrow minded. Such mentality leads to people thinking that “homosexuality is bad” and never even try to ask why, and never having chance of changing their mind.
MxM111 @ MxM111 @kbin.social Posts 1Comments 1,831Joined 2 yr. ago
Since when listening to black voters is racist?