Exactly why the aid should be tied to Ukraine. We have an obligation to defend our country first. Why are the Democrats so reluctant to defend our own border?
Imagine thinking that Aid to Ukraine uses the same resources as border control lmfao
When’s the last time we used an Abrams, Bradley, F-16, or anti-fank missiles to do border patrols?
Remember dumbass: most “10 billion dollars to Ukraine” aid packages or whatever are actually just surplus equipment, and the dollar amount is used as an approximation of value. The reality is that most of that stuff is just gonna sit in storage for another decade before being dismantled. Anything that is newer is being manufactured in the United States, meaning it is essentially government spending money on American jobs!
And if you wanna bitch and moan about defending our country, why are Republicans stalling military promotions? Is that not a bigger problem than some minor drug running?
When’s the last time we used an Abrams, Bradley, F-16, or anti-fank missiles to do border patrols?
I mean they’d be far more effective, if a bit excessive
They’d be a massive waste of resources as they are very obviously not designed for the job
Remember dumbass
Simmer down now…
Instead of refuting the point, you cry about name-calling lmao
…that would be my job…
Is that not a bigger problem than some minor drug running?
No
So leaving the military without proper leadership isn’t a bigger deal than a handful of dudes peddling some drugs…OK lol
We all know why Republicans are stalling out promotions anyway…if their God Trump gets back in, he can put allies into the driver’s seat. I can’t wait for the Republicans to finally go mask off and show just how “small government” they really are
What drug is an Ak-47 and an IED? Military isn’t in charge of the border. That’s border patrol.
So I have no issue tying money to Ukraine in return for securing our border.
If you think there aren’t already guns and homemade explosives already being made in the US, I have some bad news for you…
As for the “securing our border,” you understand that in an ideal situation the people with the bombs and guns don’t use them, right? It’s bad for business if you have to use your weapons to force a crossing every time, when there are easier ways. Furthermore, such a dramatic escalation would certainly get the military involved if it became a large enough issue, which it isn’t.
At the same time, it is ludicrous to even put border patrol and military equipment exports in the same place, as you said it yourself: military isn’t in charge of the border.
How about this: if we want to defend America and help Ukraine, we do a compromise of things that are actually related to the military? Let’s get our leadership sorted and in exchange we free up the blocks to giving Ukraine stuff.
Wait…Republicans are demanding a safer America while simultaneously crippling our army leadership AND stalling out a massive windfall for our geopolitical position? Why might that be?
You don’t get to demand shit while not even fully supporting the thing you want.
At the same time, it is ludicrous to even put border patrol and military equipment exports in the same place, as you said it yourself: the military isn’t in charge of the border.
I disagree. Democrats do this all the time as well. Sometimes you have to put up a roadblock to get things done. Do the Democrats want to hate America or give Ukraine money more?
Let’s flip that on its head:
Do Republicans like squandering geopolitical wins for the US over things that are a mild problem at best? Kneecapping an explicitly hostile power (y’know, the one that put bounties on US soldier’s heads and works with Iran) for a pittance (relatively speaking) seems like a pretty easy choice.
The border isn’t a mild problem. I
That’s fine, we should also tie border security funding to domestic gun control legislation
Do you mean unconstitutional gun control legislation?
Like this one?
https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-supreme-court-declines-block-illinois-assault-rifle-ban-2023-12-14/
Where the SCOTUS said it was in fact legal to have gun control, and in this particular case gun control banning assault rifles?
That isn’t going to hold up once SCOTUS takes the case.
Somebody failed to read the article. It was SCOTUS themselves who said it was legal.
How queer. It shows as a hyperlink when you said, Remember the convoy.
No, that isn’t what the court said. I would love to see you cite where the court said the ban was legal as they did not say it was legal or illegal.
What the court ruled is they would not allow an emergency injunction. They did not rule on taking or denying the case. What the court did say is they will let the appellate court finish before they review the case.
Once the appellate court is done then it can be sent to SCOTUS.
What? Nobody is talking about our well-regulated military’s right to use guns. Gun control is about limiting access to guns for non-military folks. Nothing in the constitution about that.
What? Nobody is talking about our well-regulated military’s right to use guns. Gun control is about limiting access to guns for non-military folks. Nothing in the constitution about that.
Heller has stated it’s an individual right outside of military service. Right or wrong, that is the ruling from the court.
That is why the Illinois ban will get struck down. An AR-15 can server a military purpose which historically was the requirement for protection under the law.
Who gives a shit about rulings from the court? They overturn their shit all the time. See Roe v. Wade. Law matters and this is it, broseiden.
Umm. The people of America.
This court is more pro 2nd amendment than the last. So I don’t see it being stayed especially using your logic.
You like that politically charged language, don’t you? This court is certainly anti-American, anti-women, and anti-children, so I concur, they would do anything they can that fosters an environment where more women, children, and Americans in general will die.
I disagree. I fell this is the best court we’ve had in my lifetime.
Removed by mod
Rule 1: No slurs, removed. 1 day ban.
