>‘We must stand by all our democratic allies,” Ronald Reagan declared during his 1985 State of the Union address. “And we must not break faith with those who are risking their lives . . . to defy Soviet-supported aggression and secure rights which have been ours from birth.” As Reagan saw it, America had both a moral and a strategic imperative to aid free peoples in resisting authoritarian aggression, as Ukraine is now. “If there had been firmer support for that principle some 45 years ago,” the president observed during his famous 1982 Westminster speech, “perhaps our generation wouldn’t have suffered the bloodletting of World War II.”
>
>A permanent end to American aid would spell disaster for Ukraine, as U.S. intelligence has warned. While European countries have actually pledged more aid than the United States, particularly in terms of financial and humanitarian assistance, Europe cannot carry the military-aid burden alone. And without U.S. leadership, many of Ukraine’s European backers may eventually lose heart and cut aid, too. Indeed, Congress’s inaction seems to have reinforced Vladimir Putin’s determination that Russia can outlast Western resolve. Kyiv’s foreign assistance will “run out some day, and it seems it already is,” he gloated last month.
>
>warned in 1984. “To keep the peace, we and our allies must . . . convince any potential aggressor that war could bring no benefit, only disaster.” Abandoning Ukraine now would send the opposite message. Moscow, Beijing, and other adversaries would learn that while Washington may initially resist their imperialist ambitions, it will eventually give up if they persist long enough.
>
>Putin, believing he’s withstood the best America had to throw at him, would only be more dangerous, especially once Moscow had rebuilt its military. Heightened instability on the European continent would, in turn, draw U.S. attention and resources away from priorities in the Indo-Pacific. After having witnessed Washington break faith with Kyiv, China might feel more inclined to pursue military aggression against Taiwan. It’s no coincidence that Taipei’s envoy to the United States has said, “Ukraine’s survival is Taiwan’s survival. Ukraine’s success is Taiwan’s success.”
>
>Republicans should never have insisted on linking these two issues in the first place, but here we are. If the aid-for-border deal is indeed dead, Johnson must move a standalone aid bill. The speaker will have to make a choice: Does he surrender to short-sighted members of his party? Or does he do what he knows to be in America’s best interest and pass more Ukraine aid?
And Regan won‘t have let the border crisis happen either. If Biden addresses the border crisis properly, he‘ll get money for Ukraine.
Reagan would not have let the immigrant situation get to this point, either. All the Dems have to do is agree to a deal that limits asylum, and dispenses with presidential parole authority.
Almost every war since the end of WW2 has been backed by the US on one side and Russia on the other, both spending vast amounts of money in the process. And here we are, with the brave men and women of Ukraine willing to fight them directly, and all of a sudden funding becomes an issue.. I really don’t understand what today’s politicians are thinking, the republicans have their heads so far up their asses.
That is so true, but he would not care what Congress would agree with or not.
Since Reagan would simply ask someone within the military to sell surplus weapons to Iran in order to finance the weapons purchased in Israel to be dropped off at the doors of Ukraine. Then hand out pardon like lottery tickets once the $hit hits the fan.
Actually, he hated the Russian so much that he would more than likely give billions to hard core Kosovo Muslim Militia to fund guerrilla support in Ukraine, and then wonder why they would fly airplanes into New York city towers after he dumps them to the curb the day after the Russians would pull of of Ukraine.
Using Reagan policies is a terrible argument to justify military support for Ukraine.
Quite a few Russki puppets on this one. Are you fucks sad you got kicked off German Twitter?
Back when Republicans had a spine and integrity
dont try to make a hero out of that asshole. he would be the worst example if in today’s go. they are all worms
I agree. I won’t be voting for anyone this US election season that doesn’t support Ukraine.
Trump has dirt on these Republicans! that’s the only thing that makes sense
If you’re an American who wants Republicans to act more like Reagan on this issue, you need to press your government. We can coordinate over at r/ActionForUkraine. There’s also [a website](https://stopwarinukraine.com/support-ukraine-write-to-your-reps-in-congress/) to help make it clear that you support Ukraine. Feel free to spread the word as much as you can.
Ronald Reagan isn’t Vladimir Putin but the Republican Party of 2024 is the party of Putin. “May the truth, set you free”
Trump is bought and paid for by putin and trump runs maga and maga is the republican party.
He had no problem screwing over working-class Americans but would undoubtedly have stood up to ruZZia
Ronald Reagan is a big reason for why this war is even happening at all, so can we please stop using him as a reference point?
Lol no. He would be pro-Russia today like the rest of the Republican Party.
They hated communist Russia. They love hyper corrupt oligarch, homophobic, fascist, white Christian ethnostate Russia.
16 comments
>‘We must stand by all our democratic allies,” Ronald Reagan declared during his 1985 State of the Union address. “And we must not break faith with those who are risking their lives . . . to defy Soviet-supported aggression and secure rights which have been ours from birth.” As Reagan saw it, America had both a moral and a strategic imperative to aid free peoples in resisting authoritarian aggression, as Ukraine is now. “If there had been firmer support for that principle some 45 years ago,” the president observed during his famous 1982 Westminster speech, “perhaps our generation wouldn’t have suffered the bloodletting of World War II.”
>
>A permanent end to American aid would spell disaster for Ukraine, as U.S. intelligence has warned. While European countries have actually pledged more aid than the United States, particularly in terms of financial and humanitarian assistance, Europe cannot carry the military-aid burden alone. And without U.S. leadership, many of Ukraine’s European backers may eventually lose heart and cut aid, too. Indeed, Congress’s inaction seems to have reinforced Vladimir Putin’s determination that Russia can outlast Western resolve. Kyiv’s foreign assistance will “run out some day, and it seems it already is,” he gloated last month.
>
>warned in 1984. “To keep the peace, we and our allies must . . . convince any potential aggressor that war could bring no benefit, only disaster.” Abandoning Ukraine now would send the opposite message. Moscow, Beijing, and other adversaries would learn that while Washington may initially resist their imperialist ambitions, it will eventually give up if they persist long enough.
>
>Putin, believing he’s withstood the best America had to throw at him, would only be more dangerous, especially once Moscow had rebuilt its military. Heightened instability on the European continent would, in turn, draw U.S. attention and resources away from priorities in the Indo-Pacific. After having witnessed Washington break faith with Kyiv, China might feel more inclined to pursue military aggression against Taiwan. It’s no coincidence that Taipei’s envoy to the United States has said, “Ukraine’s survival is Taiwan’s survival. Ukraine’s success is Taiwan’s success.”
>
>Republicans should never have insisted on linking these two issues in the first place, but here we are. If the aid-for-border deal is indeed dead, Johnson must move a standalone aid bill. The speaker will have to make a choice: Does he surrender to short-sighted members of his party? Or does he do what he knows to be in America’s best interest and pass more Ukraine aid?
And Regan won‘t have let the border crisis happen either. If Biden addresses the border crisis properly, he‘ll get money for Ukraine.
Reagan would not have let the immigrant situation get to this point, either. All the Dems have to do is agree to a deal that limits asylum, and dispenses with presidential parole authority.
Almost every war since the end of WW2 has been backed by the US on one side and Russia on the other, both spending vast amounts of money in the process. And here we are, with the brave men and women of Ukraine willing to fight them directly, and all of a sudden funding becomes an issue.. I really don’t understand what today’s politicians are thinking, the republicans have their heads so far up their asses.
That is so true, but he would not care what Congress would agree with or not.
Since Reagan would simply ask someone within the military to sell surplus weapons to Iran in order to finance the weapons purchased in Israel to be dropped off at the doors of Ukraine. Then hand out pardon like lottery tickets once the $hit hits the fan.
Actually, he hated the Russian so much that he would more than likely give billions to hard core Kosovo Muslim Militia to fund guerrilla support in Ukraine, and then wonder why they would fly airplanes into New York city towers after he dumps them to the curb the day after the Russians would pull of of Ukraine.
Using Reagan policies is a terrible argument to justify military support for Ukraine.
Quite a few Russki puppets on this one. Are you fucks sad you got kicked off German Twitter?
Back when Republicans had a spine and integrity
dont try to make a hero out of that asshole. he would be the worst example if in today’s go. they are all worms
I agree. I won’t be voting for anyone this US election season that doesn’t support Ukraine.
Trump has dirt on these Republicans! that’s the only thing that makes sense
If you’re an American who wants Republicans to act more like Reagan on this issue, you need to press your government. We can coordinate over at r/ActionForUkraine. There’s also [a website](https://stopwarinukraine.com/support-ukraine-write-to-your-reps-in-congress/) to help make it clear that you support Ukraine. Feel free to spread the word as much as you can.
Ronald Reagan isn’t Vladimir Putin but the Republican Party of 2024 is the party of Putin. “May the truth, set you free”
Trump is bought and paid for by putin and trump runs maga and maga is the republican party.
He had no problem screwing over working-class Americans but would undoubtedly have stood up to ruZZia
Ronald Reagan is a big reason for why this war is even happening at all, so can we please stop using him as a reference point?
Lol no. He would be pro-Russia today like the rest of the Republican Party.
They hated communist Russia. They love hyper corrupt oligarch, homophobic, fascist, white Christian ethnostate Russia.