322

Biden blames ‘congressional inaction’ for Ukrainian withdrawal of key town in call with Zelensky (www.cnn.com)

submitted 7 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

30 comments fedilink hide all child comments

President Joe Biden, in a call Saturday with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, directly tied Ukraine’s withdrawal from the key town of Avdiivka to Congress’ inability to pass further aid for the country’s effort to fend off Russia’s invasion.

“This morning, Ukraine’s military was forced to withdraw from Avdiivka after Ukrainian soldiers had to ration ammunition due to dwindling supplies as a result of congressional inaction, resulting in Russia’s first notable gains in months. President Biden emphasized the need for Congress to urgently pass the national security supplemental funding bill to resupply Ukrainian forces,” according to a White House readout of the call.

The call bookended a week defined by US attempts to reassert leadership on the world stage. It also highlighted renewed urgency to pass additional funds for Ukraine amid the withdrawal from Avdiivka, a key town that in recent months became one of the most fiercely contested battles on the eastern front, and the news of Kremlin critic Alexey Navalny’s death.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Jaytreeman@kbin.social -1 points 7 months ago

I didn't reference the events that you did.
What was the purpose of NATO? Is it still expanding?
Putin lying about the 'treaty' is more about internal propaganda.

https://academic.oup.com/dh/article-abstract/44/2/237/5699276?login=false

Why are people so against the possibility that the US government could be doing that again, but in Ukraine now?

[-] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 6 points 7 months ago

What was the purpose of NATO?

NATO is a defensive alliance. Kinda seemed unnecessary with the fall of the Soviet Union, but with Russia starting land wars in Europe, has become extremely relevant again. Basically just prevents other countries from invading NATO countries. Putin doesn't like it because he wants to invade countries. Countries like joining NATO because they don't like being invaded.

Is it still expanding?

Yes. Finland has joined and Sweden is soon to join. After Putin's invasion of Ukraine they didn't want to also be invaded. They never joined during the Cold War, they weren't as worried about the Soviet Union doing something as they are about Putin trying to attack them. So Putin has actually created the latest "expansion" of NATO, and now has a significantly longer border with NATO because of Finland joining. If NATO was the concern, this is a strategic defeat for Russia no matter the outcome of the war in Ukraine.

Why are people so against the possibility that the US government could be doing that again, but in Ukraine now?

Because it's not at all the same situation. Ukraine is a democracy. Afghanistan had a Soviet puppet government the the Soviets were using their military to prop up.

Besides, this kind of "trap" depends on Russia wanting to invade another country. It can be easily avoided by simply not invading another country.

A lot of this logic relies on Russia having the right to invade Ukraine. It does not. Ukrainians have the right to join or not join NATO. It's their decision, not anyone else's. If Ukrainians want to join NATO, it does not give Russia the right to invade to prevent it from happening.

[-] EatATaco@lemm.ee 2 points 7 months ago

I'm not against the possibility. Where did you get that idea? If you had some convincing evidence that this was the case, I would be interested in seeing it.

this post was submitted on 18 Feb 2024

322 points (97.6% liked)

politics

18894 readers

5816 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News