null
Additional Posts
How much does purchasing 7 ADO cost?
Does big 4 pays for your certifications?
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
{
"media_type": "text",
"post_content": "Why is US not sending army in Ukraine to help out? One reason they give us Ukraine is not part of NATO but Afghanistan was so not part of NATO still US went in! Just.",
"post_id": "622577f469fcc000399cb7e0",
"reply_count": 101,
"vote_count": 26,
"bowl_id": "552d1d24dc1c586b09d2d051",
"bowl_name": "Consulting",
"feed_type": "crowd"
}
Download Fishbowl to see what others are saying
Send download link to your phone
IT TOOK 20 YEARS, 4 PRESIDENTS, THOUSANDS OF INNOCENT KILLINGS AND MANY HUNDRED BILLIONS PROBABLY TRILLION PLUS DOLLARS FOR USA TO TAKE AFGHANISTAN FROM TALIBAN AND THEN HAND IT BACK TO TALIBAN WITH AMERICAN WEAPONARY AS BONUS. And you want them to muddle in Ukraine and Russia war? Some may still trust in US competency but the history speaks differently. And Taliban leaders were not found in Afghanistan but in a different country.
Chief
The United States absolutely cannot put troops on the ground. But as early as December 2021, the Biden admin armed Ukraine to hit Russian aircraft and tanks, and prep for urban combat. This is likely the primary reason that Ukraine is still standing. As war loomed, the Pentagon was equipping Ukrainian fighters with arms and equipment useful for fighting in urban areas, including shotguns and specialized suits to safeguard soldiers handling unexploded ordnance. Variety, volume, and potency of firepower being rushed into the war zone illustrate the extent to which the United States sought to prepare the Ukrainian military.
Rising Star
Believe it or not, the US armed Ukraine before Biden. Trump tried to delay it to get them to fabricate dirt on Biden, but he actually did send lethal aid.
Obama refused to do the same when Russia invaded the Crimea about 8 years earlier.
Everyday on this app I get reminded that salary, job title, and education are not at all correlated with intelligence.
Thank you sir, you made my day and provided me closure after i am traumatized by this short sighted post.
Pro
Because Russia has nukes.
Chief
I mean, they know they wouldn’t survive a nuclear war. This isn’t like in the movies where we launch ICBMs from the mid-west and then all take cover in shelters as we wait for them to cross the globe.
The US ballistic missile submarine fleet features submarines that each can carry 24 (soon to be 20) Trident missiles, which in turn can carry up to 14 warheads each. They have a range of 7,500 miles and can reach their targets within 10 minutes of launch. Approximately 50% of the US’s nuclear arsenal is deployed in this configuration, and represents 1,152 warheads spread across 288 missiles, carried by 14 different ballistic missile submarines. Each individual sub could destroy every major metropolitan city in Russia, with dozens of warheads to spare. We can park all 14 of those submarines off the coast of Russia.
As as much as Putin loves to sabre-rattle, he understands the calculus of what he is up against. We don’t want a war either, but think of how little time 10 minutes represents… that’s how quickly it would backfire and escalate.
OW2 is right: they are a deterrent. But no one realistically wants to use them.
Chief
USA went into Afghanistan to get terrorists that killed 2000 US citizens because the Taliban wouldn’t hand them over for prosecution. This comparison doesn’t make sense.
Rising Star
A3, he wasn’t in Pakistan at the time. OBL was protected by the Taliban government and allowed to operate there with impunity. That’s why we went in and removed them from power.
We didn’t have an exit strategy unfortunately, or alignment on an overarching goal after overthrowing the Taliban and/or killing OBL. That’s the big reason why Allied involvement in Afghanistan turned into a shit show and ultimately back into Taliban control.
Russia and US need to step away from Ukraine. No NATO in Ukraine no Russia in Ukraine, else the fault line between the two tectonic forces will burn
Chief
D1, not quite. Before this situation popped off, NATO was primarily becoming an economic alliance as opposed to a defensive alliance as it was designed to be, a counterweight to Soviet Union. Problem is the Soviet Union no longer exists, so what’s the point of having a military presence?
Contrary to conservative talking points, the US has actually been withdrawing slowly from their military position in NATO, and NATO membership was starting to be a sort of part 2 of EU membership, with economic impact being weighted heavier. Ukraine just didn’t have the perceived economic value to gain entry. But, boy has that changed and we were wrong.
This whole situation has been a heck of a wake up call and now NATO sees how short sighted it’s been, because, surprise surprise, Russia’s true aspirations is to be the old CCCP (or maybe I should say the new CCCP?) and are showing they will act on those aspirations. And now, NATO is fully galvanized, more than ever, and NATO, and especially the US, is showing they are, by far, still the most powerful dude on the block, diplomatically, economically, and militarily. The world has FLOCKED to the US and NATO, and the US’s influence is more potent than it’s ever been. They are, far and away, the preferred friend and ally on the planet. The US is showing, in real time, they can beat you into complete submission without firing a shot and the world is fully behind it.
NATO is going to grow because of this conflict, which means moving east. It’s strategically and economically imperative to do so and the opportunity is too great to pass up. Remember, China and India/Brazil, who have been quietly becoming authoritarian regimes, are watching, and they know their people are watching. There might even be a greater expansion of the US’s Pacific alliances as well because of this. Who’s going to pass up an opportunity to truly expand your realm of influence while simultaneously shrink your competition’s (Russia & China) influence at the same time? You’d have to be a fool to let that happen (which Trump would have).
Yeah, it may be a two way street, but the US is showing they are the ones that built the street and truly owns the street. Make no mistake, the US just got its groove back in a big way and all the big players have been knocked back on their heels.
Rising Star
Because the middle East has things the US wanted
US invaded Pakistan for 7 years?! Come on man!
I'm sure you can figure out another reason why the USA invaded Afghanistan
Who lets you manage people
Will you enlist?
BCG3. Also true. At the end of most work days I miss the people I served with more than the people I work with. Mainly for the common sense and ability to get things done without whining that seems to be lacking in so many recent college graduates
Not sure I get the comparison.
There they went in for American interest not to defend Afghanistan from anyone. Here it's for Ukraine thats the question.
Because it would start ww3
Is this ignorance or propaganda?
Chief
Both
Rising Star
US went in Afghanistan, a non-nuclear country. Russian nuclear warheads exceed American counts. American entry assures the next world war. It is smart to stay on sidelines and empower those who stand up to Russia (there is a wisdom to FDR WW2 strategy)
How about we start with - what economic benefits or opportunities does America get by getting involved?
Humans as bots 🤖😂
Chief
I’m lost. D1 is obviously a Russian bot. But which country owns OP?
Is this a real question? Why is the US not sending forces to square off against the Russian military??
No oil in Ukraine for Uncle Sam
Chief
A lot of petroleum infrastructure though
Tell me you don’t understand basic geopolitics without telling me you don’t understand basic geopolitics