It was a compromise so the smaller states were willing to join the United States. Same reason there are two senators for each state.

They voted on it in the house, and for democrats it was 125 for and 108 against, and 1 republican voting for it. So yes a majority of house democrats voted for it.

This is shallow, but here it is… When you are dating to marry look at the womans mother to see what her weight will probably be like after having kids. If her parents are big, she will probably be big.

Yeah I am in my 40s and I when its quiet I hear that squealing and I really cant hear what I used to.

Cool then what is your reason that we should fund Ukraine?

Sure dude, I totally did…

Sorry, I means to say “once Ukraine loses”.

Yes sir

1. We have to give weapons so that Ukraine can win.

2. Russia is Nazi Germany and will keep taking over all of Europe so we need to stop them now.

Both of these arguments are terrible and have huge holes.

So you think that once russia loses they are going to invade further into Europe after they had a hard time taking over Ukraine?

I am taking the logical argument in the direction that you guys are thinking to show its logically inconsistent. You guys just dont understand what is going on there and repeating one of two different talking point directions.

Yes, being friendly with the west and exiting the russian sphere is considered a threat against russia to them. You can no like it, but I am all about avoiding war and dead people. Those countries mean nothing to us and we should have no part in their politics.

Yeah because they didnt want them to join nato. Why wouldnt nato just say “we have no interest in having Georgia and Ukraine in nato” to prevent wars?

If Russia is probably capable of doing what Nazi Germany did, why would giving them weapons to defend themselves end in a win?

Cool, that is not what we are talking about right now.

What your logic seems to be saying is - you are in favor of giving weapons to Ukraine so they can fight and weaken Russia, but they never had a chance of winning because Russia is strong enough to semi-replicate what Nazi germany did. So you are willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of Ukrainians to weaken Russia. What part about this is not what you believe?

They actually had a tentative agreement in Spring of 2022, but then NATO flew in and offered them money and weaponry so they could fight more. I am not moving the goal posts I am just telling you what reality is - Ukraine is going to lose, there is no other outcome.

What happens when they run out of men to fight?

Cool, they are not going to do that so what is the actual way to get back the eastern territories?

It hasnt gone anywhere because it wont pass. Do you doubt that democrats would pass this if they could and get more voters?

So you think its irrelevant what the opinions of other countries just as long as your government thinks its right? How many wars could have been avoided by listening to the grievances of other cultures?

Apparently you are not aware that the war could have ended two years ago but Boris Johnson flew in and offered them weapons to keep fighting. What your logic seems to be saying is - you are in favor of giving weapons to Ukraine so they can fight and weaken Russia, but they never had a chance of winning because Russia is strong enough to semi-replicate what Nazi germany did. So you are willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of Ukrainians to weaken Russia. What part about this is not what you believe?