That’s only kind of true. There’s a lot of money that could be found in funding Gaza. As someone made a point elsewhere in this thread. Money was made in Ukraine due to us funding it and some creative accounting, but the smart money move was to allow Russia to invade and save money/exploit off the back of the chaos.
In an almost identical way the U.S. could have funded Gaza and made money dragging out the war, but it didn’t happen because of decades of entrenched racism and Zionism.
Not directly, but by sending weapons etc to Ukraine, the US can basically wage war against Russia with no casualties of their own, while replacing the old stuff they send with new stuff, as well as justifying more military spending in the budget. For the right people, there’s plenty of profits to be made.
A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction. . . . American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. . . . This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. . . .Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. . . . In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
Dwight D Eisenhower’s farewell address, 1961
There was absolutely money in Ukraine. When you read “billions of dollars in weapons sent”, if Ukraine received the weapons who do you think received the billion dollars?
For European countries supporting Ukraine is also important for their own safety. If Russia were to win it will go on to attack the next country. Every loss Russia suffers in Ukraine is a win for places like Romania, Moldavia etc.
$$ Money $$
There’s no money in helping Gaza.
That’s only kind of true. There’s a lot of money that could be found in funding Gaza. As someone made a point elsewhere in this thread. Money was made in Ukraine due to us funding it and some creative accounting, but the smart money move was to allow Russia to invade and save money/exploit off the back of the chaos.
In an almost identical way the U.S. could have funded Gaza and made money dragging out the war, but it didn’t happen because of decades of entrenched racism and Zionism.
There was no money in helping Ukraine, yet it was done. 100% lack of optics due to racism.
Not directly, but by sending weapons etc to Ukraine, the US can basically wage war against Russia with no casualties of their own, while replacing the old stuff they send with new stuff, as well as justifying more military spending in the budget. For the right people, there’s plenty of profits to be made.
Dwight D Eisenhower’s farewell address, 1961
There was absolutely money in Ukraine. When you read “billions of dollars in weapons sent”, if Ukraine received the weapons who do you think received the billion dollars?
Ukraine is one of the worlds bread baskets and critical to global infrastructure. There was very much money in helping Ukraine.
For European countries supporting Ukraine is also important for their own safety. If Russia were to win it will go on to attack the next country. Every loss Russia suffers in Ukraine is a win for places like Romania, Moldavia etc.
I would say “interests at large” rather than dollars.
Ukraine is military strategic interest (nobody in Europe wants to have Russia to randomly decide to start a war with an EU country)
In Middle East (with oil) is dollars
In Taiwan is military strategic interest
On the other side of the spectrum? Myanmar, Gaza, random African conflicts, etc
There’s rare earth minerals.
Gaza has nothing other than beachfront real estate, but you got to remove them in order to take advantage of that.
And yet, as soon as Trump took office they stopped helping ukraine. Your argument is shit, mate.
Because Trump is a Russian asset and defunding Ukraine benefits Putin.
Your basic understanding of global politics is shit, mate.
Oh, i thought it was only racism. My bad, cant believe where i got that idea from.
It’s your lack of basic reading comprehension. See, she said “racism”, not “ONLY BECAUSE OF racism”.
See those extra words? They modify the context.
Oh boy, now I have to define context…
Oh boy. If you they would have put that into their argument so that it wasn’t shit 😄
The word you’re actually looking for is xenophobic, not racism. Xenophobia explains the decisionmaking of states where the culture is at odds.