Polish Leader Calls on Mike Johnson to Pass Ukraine Aid

[wing2000]

After a meeting at the White House this week, Polish Primer Minister Donald Tusk called on Mike Johnson to pass the Ukraine Aid bill that he has refused to bring to the House floor for a vote (even though most political observers think it would pass).

..Tusk warned Johnson’s failure to act could cost “thousands of lives” in Ukraine, including those of women and children.

He said he hoped “the voice of Poland will influence and change the attitude of the Speaker of the House. Mr. Johnson, me must be aware, and I hope that he is already aware, that on his individual decision depends the fate of millions of people — in fact on his decision depends thousands [of] lives in Ukraine.”

Tusk recognized the political differences in Congress over funding Ukraine but argued Johnson’s decision would have a global impact.

“This is not some political skirmish that only matters here in America. The absence of this positive decision of Mr. Johnson will really cost thousands of lives there: children, women. He must be aware of his personal responsibility,” the Polish leader said.

Polish leader presses Johnson on Ukraine aid: ‘Fate of millions of people’ depends on it

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk this week called on Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) to move a Senate-passed Ukraine funding package that has stalled in the House, warning the “fate of millions of pe…

thehill.com

 

[Ophiolite]

Sadly, it seems in some quarters that re-electing Trump, and following his direction till that happens, is more important than lives.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

If the calculation which matters here is the lives of Ukrainians , then more lives would have been saved had there not been any western intervention in the conflict.
From the point of view of liberal globalists like Tusk, the goal is not to save lives but to secure western hegemony by undermining a potential rival. In that cost analysis lives don't matter. Power and securing it is what truly matters. Millions of Ukrainians could die but if that is the cost of undermining Russia (what did Lindsey Graham say, the US is killing Russians at a bargain cost while losing none of their own?), then it is well worth the cost to preserve this conflict.
Bottom-line is, those who are speaking about lives but are unwilling to compromise with a geostrategic enemy are lying or using rhetoric. What Ukraine needs is a settlement. Not aid which can only preserve the conflict and cause more death in the long term. All for what? So that a rainbow flag of the west can fly over Kiev?

 

[Hans Blaster]

If the calculation which matters here is the lives of Ukrainians , then more lives would have been saved had there not been any western intervention in the conflict.

We should have just left the Ukrainians to be overrun and massacred by Russia? How would that save lives?

From the point of view of liberal globalists like Tusk, the goal is not to save lives but to secure western hegemony by undermining a potential rival. In that cost analysis lives don't matter. Power and securing it is what truly matters. Millions of Ukrainians could die but if that is the cost of undermining Russia (what did Lindsey Graham say, the US is killing Russians at a bargain cost while losing none of their own?), then it is well worth the cost to preserve this conflict.
Bottom-line is, those who are speaking about lives but are unwilling to compromise with a geostrategic enemy are lying or using rhetoric. What Ukraine needs is a settlement. Not aid which can only preserve the conflict and cause more death in the long term. All for what?

Russia made the first move, and it was an error.

So that a rainbow flag of the west can fly over Kiev?

Is everything an LGBTQ conspiracy? This has nothing to do with "rainbow flags".

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

We should have just left the Ukrainians to be overrun and massacred by Russia? How would that save lives?

You believe it was the Russian plan to genocide all Ukrainians? What do you base this on? Would people have died if the Ukraine had been left to it's own devices? Sure, but it would have been less so than now. Unless you are seriously proposing that the Russians are genocidal and that was always the plan.

Russia made the first move, and it was an error.

From a realist geostrategic point of view I see Russia's moves as a necessity. It's only an error if they lose and I do not believe Russia will lose this war. Ukraine will and it will be on worse terms than it could have had prior to the start of this war.

Is everything an LGBTQ conspiracy? This has nothing to do with "rainbow flags".

Don't be autistic. I am mocking the ideology of the dominant powers that the leaders of Ukraine have embraced. The rainbow flag is simply the best representation of that ideology.

 

[Hans Blaster]

You believe it was the Russian plan to genocide all Ukrainians? What do you base this on? Would people have died if the Ukraine had been left to it's own devices? Sure, but it would have been less so than now. Unless you are seriously proposing that the Russians are genocidal and that was always the plan.

I've watched their propaganda.

From a realist geostrategic point of view I see Russia's moves as a necessity. It's only an error if they lose and I do not believe Russia will lose this war.

Russia already lost.

Ukraine will and it will be on worse terms than it could have had prior to the start of this war.

And why oh why should a country just surrender their territory on the threat of invasion? That would be dumb.

Don't be autistic. I am mocking the ideology of the dominant powers that the leaders of Ukraine have embraced. The rainbow flag is simply the best representation of that ideology.

Austisic? What kind of crack is that? How dare you use autism as an insult.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

I've watched their propaganda.

And they've said they want to genocide every last Ukrainian?

Russia already lost.

That's yet to be seen. I've seen how the western narrative didn't quite play out how we were told it would. We were told Russia would be internationally isolated, yet it is only Isolated from Western countries and it's BRICS partnerships have actually expanded. We were told how sanctions would destroy the Russian economy yet it hasn't been destroyed and has simply reoriented itself away from Western markets. If Russia has lost, then the USA and the West have also lost. Arguably countries like Germany have been hurt far more than Russia has since Germany's economy heavily relied on cheap Russian gas.

And why oh why should a country just surrender their territory on the threat of invasion? That would be dumb.

Russia never asked for territory to be exchanged. All Putin wanted was Ukrainian neutrality and it not joining NATO. As it stands now because Ukraine has dragged out this conflict it stands to lose far more than just neutrality.

Austisic? What kind of crack is that? How dare you use autism as an insult.

Okay Greta. Don't be a sperg then. Am I allowed to use that since I was diagnosed with that?

Spare me the moral outrage.

 

[Hans Blaster]

And they've said they want to genocide every last Ukrainian?

Did anyone claim that?

That's yet to be seen. I've seen how the western narrative didn't quite play out how we were told it would. We were told Russia would be internationally isolated, yet it is only Isolated from Western countries and it's BRICS partnerships have actually expanded. We were told how sanctions would destroy the Russian economy yet it hasn't been destroyed and has simply reoriented itself away from Western markets. If Russia has lost, then the USA and the West have also lost. Arguably countries like Germany have been hurt far more than Russia has since Germany's economy heavily relied on cheap Russian gas.

Russia's army is all but destroyed. A shell of its former self. (Their oil refineries keep catching fire too.)

Russia never asked for territory to be exchanged. All Putin wanted was Ukrainian neutrality and it not joining NATO. As it stands now because Ukraine has dragged out this conflict it stands to lose far more than just neutrality.

Exchanged? Russia invaded in 2014 and 2022. That's how aggressors behave.

Okay Greta.

Greta who? Are you trying to misgender me?

Don't be a sperg then.

"sperg"?

Am I allowed to use that since I was diagnosed with that?

Spare me the moral outrage.

I don't care what excuse you use for your ill behavior.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Did anyone claim that?

Russia's army is all but destroyed. A shell of its former self. (Their oil refineries keep catching fire too.)

It depends on what source you're looking at. I know that's what western aligned sources say but Russian aligned sources suggest the complete opposite and I don't buy into the propaganda of any side necessarily. Though I tend to think the Russians aren't destroyed and have actually learned more about this kind of warfare than any other country in the world besides Ukraine. Unlike the USA who can only kill brown people with AKs in the desert. This is an actual and that forces both sides to innovate in order to defeat the enemy. I don't believe the Russians are stupid and that they are capable of learning. This won't leave them weaker but stronger by the end of this conflict.

Exchanged? Russia invaded in 2014 and 2022. That's how aggressors behave.

They invaded Crimea because it was in their strategic interests in 2014. In 2022 before the war started Putin wasn't asking for land, he was asking for Ukrainian neutrality. I believe if Ukraine was willing to give that this war would not have happened because Russia would not have seen it's sphere of influence in Ukraine being threatened. Yet if there's one thing I've realized a realist approach to geopolitics can never be had with someone of your persuasion. Because you don't respect power centres other than your own this means you cannot compromise with the perceived enemy ever. Unipolar dominance must be maintained at any cost. The lives of Ukrainians be damned.

Greta who? Are you trying to misgender me?

Are you a boomer or something?

"sperg"?

Yeah, sperg. It's a term for someone with Asperger's.

I don't care what excuse you use for your ill behavior.

I don't care for your fake moral outrage either.

 

[Hans Blaster]

It depends on what source you're looking at. I know that's what western aligned sources say but Russian aligned sources suggest the complete opposite and I don't buy into the propaganda of any side necessarily. Though I tend to think the Russians aren't destroyed and have actually learned more about this kind of warfare than any other country in the world besides Ukraine. Unlike the USA who can only kill brown people with AKs in the desert. This is an actual and that forces both sides to innovate in order to defeat the enemy. I don't believe the Russians are stupid and that they are capable of learning. This won't leave them weaker but stronger by the end of this conflict.

I've read the Russian sources (translated).

They invaded Crimea because it was in their strategic interests in 2014. In 2022 before the war started Putin wasn't asking for land, he was asking for Ukrainian neutrality. I believe if Ukraine was willing to give that this war would not have happened because Russia would not have seen it's sphere of influence in Ukraine being threatened. Yet if there's one thing I've realized a realist approach to geopolitics can never be had with someone of your persuasion. Because you don't respect power centres other than your own this means you cannot compromise with the perceived enemy ever. Unipolar dominance must be maintained at any cost. The lives of Ukrainians be damned.

They weren't taking for land, but they invaded, capture, and annexed land (twice) anyway? There is no excuse for this. Why do you excuse it?

Are you a boomer or something?

No. The age listed in my profile is roughly accurate. Never been called a boomer or autistic or Greta before.

Yeah, sperg. It's a term for someone with Asperger's.

Never heard it and no I ain't on any spectrum.

I don't care for your fake moral outrage either.

It's not fake. I find your behavior morally deficient.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

I've read the Russian sources (translated).

As have I.

They weren't taking for land, but they invaded, capture, and annexed land (twice) anyway? There is no excuse for this. Why do you excuse it?

There's always an excuse for invading and taking land. Every country is guilty of it to some degree or another. It's for instance a proud tradition of your beloved USA to invade the Middle East in order to spread democracy. Yet you'll recall the original point of my response was to question the Idea that funding the war will save lives. You could only defend the Idea of helping the Ukrainians on the basis that the Russians were going to massacre them, which implies genocide. I maintain the numbers of dead, if the war had ended in 2022 would have been far less than it would have been now. Hence why prolonging this war, instead of coming to a settlement, will only result in more dead.

My point is that if you actually cared about the lives primarily before any other concern you would be willing to find a settlement with Russia. But you don't care about that. You care about some principle that it's wrong for big countries to invade little countries, unless they're the USA.

No. The age listed in my profile is roughly accurate. Never been called a boomer or autistic or Greta before.

Now you have.

It's not fake. I find your behavior morally deficient.

Which doesn't mean much coming from you.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Which doesn't mean much coming from you.

How so?

 

[trophy33]

You believe it was the Russian plan to genocide all Ukrainians? What do you base this on? Would people have died if the Ukraine had been left to it's own devices? Sure, but it would have been less so than now. Unless you are seriously proposing that the Russians are genocidal and that was always the plan.

From a realist geostrategic point of view I see Russia's moves as a necessity. It's only an error if they lose and I do not believe Russia will lose this war. Ukraine will and it will be on worse terms than it could have had prior to the start of this war.

Don't be autistic. I am mocking the ideology of the dominant powers that the leaders of Ukraine have embraced. The rainbow flag is simply the best representation of that ideology.

Does the rainbow flag fly over Budapest or Warsaw? Both Hungary and Poland are in NATO and the EU.

Its possible to be in the "western block" and to stay traditional or conservative.

 

[7thKeeper]

They invaded Crimea because it was in their strategic interests in 2014. In 2022 before the war started Putin wasn't asking for land, he was asking for Ukrainian neutrality.

Kinda hard to ask for that when you've invaded the nation less than 10 years earlier. And even funnier arguing that he wasn't asking for land right after talking about invading another country.

On the genocide point, several Russian outlets have called for it, but if we want to take a look at actual actions, the forced relocation and russofication of Ukrainian children does seem to fill the definition of genocide as put up by the Genocide Convention, according to sources. I'd have to read it myself to make my own mind, but I've seen some of the arguements made for this and I can see where they are coming from.

 

[7thKeeper]

Does the rainbow flag fly over Budapest or Warsaw? Both Hungary and Poland are in NATO and the EU.

Its possible to be in the "western block" and to stay traditional or conservative.

This rainbow flag obsession shown by some in this thread does seem kinda weird.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Does the rainbow flag fly over Budapest or Warsaw? Both Hungary and Poland are in NATO and the EU.

Its possible to be in the "western block" and to stay traditional or conservative.

Is it? Hungary is trying to retain traditionalism and is facing pressure from every corner of the West in order to conform itself to the dominant progressive liberalism of the USA and Europe broadly. You cannot join the west without the west imposing itself on you.
It just so happens the west's ideology is best captured by radical individualism, a rainbow flag and consumerism.

Ukraine, if it were to join the West completely, would end up becoming less Orthodox, less traditional and more gay.

Kinda hard to ask for that when you've invaded the nation less than 10 years earlier. And even funnier arguing that he wasn't asking for land right after talking about invading another country.

Except he wasn't. All Putin wanted prior the 2022 invasion was Ukrainian neutrality. Ukraine and the USA refused this. Which lead to the war.

On the genocide point, several Russian outlets have called for it, but if we want to take a look at actual actions, the forced relocation and russofication of Ukrainian children does seem to fill the definition of genocide as put up by the Genocide Convention, according to sources. I'd have to read it myself to make my own mind, but I've seen some of the arguements made for this and I can see where they are coming from.

If that counts as Genocide then we might as well consider Ukraine guilty of the same thing, banning pro Russian political parties and News outlets, targeting the Russian Orthodox Church, banning the speaking of Russian in education and various other Anti-Russian sentiments. You could also consider the targeting of Russian Ukrainians in the Donbass a Genocide if we're going to be liberal with the term. But we should be technical. Is it the Russian or Ukrainian war goal to exterminate the other as official state policy? I don't think so and so we need to ask, if the preservation of life is the most important thing, wouldn't coming to a negotiated settlement be the best thing? If that is not an option and the Ukraine must fight, then the preservation of life is less important when compared to some principle of Ukrainian sovereignty.

I suppose however if you view the Russians always having the motive to systematically exterminate the Ukrainians then this justifies the war, except I think this is just delusional war propaganda of the Neoliberal/Neocon variety which always seeks to justify US interventions everywhere in the world.

 

[wing2000]

Except he wasn't. All Putin wanted prior the 2022 invasion was Ukrainian neutrality. Ukraine and the USA refused this. Which lead to the war.

Ukraine has that right. Putin does not.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Ukraine has that right. Putin does not.

So you would be of the opinion that the lives of Ukrainian people matter less than the sovereignty of Ukraine?

As far as I can tell when it comes to relationships between countries, smaller countries like the Ukraine have only the rights which are allowed to them by bigger and far more powerful countries. Americans think for instance that Iran should not have the right to nuclear weapons or that middle eastern countries are to be controlled and dominated by the USA.

As far as I can tell, in the game of international diplomacy, there are no rights and you could never apply such a rule consistently, especially as an American.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

Don't be autistic.

Reported.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Kinda hard to ask for that when you've invaded the nation less than 10 years earlier. And even funnier arguing that he wasn't asking for land right after talking about invading another country.

On the genocide point, several Russian outlets have called for it, but if we want to take a look at actual actions, the forced relocation and russofication of Ukrainian children does seem to fill the definition of genocide as put up by the Genocide Convention, according to sources. I'd have to read it myself to make my own mind, but I've seen some of the arguements made for this and I can see where they are coming from.

Here's just one recent clip from a Russian opinion host. (The nastiest bits start around 2:45.) It was triggered by the birthday of a famous Ukrainian writer that the Russian host redefines as a mediocre Russian writer and then proceeds to talk about the reprogramming of Ukrainians to "restore" them to being proper Russians. Cultural obiliteration is a form of genocide under the Geneva Conventions.