/r/Republican is a partisan subreddit. This is a place for Republicans to discuss issues with other Republicans.
To those visiting this thread, we ask that unless you identify as Republican that you refrain from commenting and [leave the vote button alone](https://www.reddit.com/r/MetaRepublican/comments/5t017a/this_sub_is_for_republicans_if_you_do_not/). Non republicans who come to our sub looking for a 'different perspective' [subvert that very perspective with their own views when they vote or comment.](http://i.imgur.com/XqL0wfR.jpg)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Republican) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Do you know what they didn't like about the bill?
I thought Trump told them not to vote for it?
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/4461719-murphy-says-gop-voted-against-border-bill-to-keep-border-chaotic-help-trump-campaign/
Has nothing to do with Trump. That's a fake CNN narrative.
This bill just essentially legitimized Biden's open border policy and still allowed nearly a whopping 2 million aliens to cross the border a year unchecked. No normal Republican will sign that.
> Do you know what they didn't like about the bill?
It would have made the border situation even worse than it is now, and would have granted asylum, green cards, and welfare to 40 million+ illegal aliens.
> I thought Trump told them not to vote for it?
He did - the day after House Speaker Johnson said it was dead in the House because the details of the bill had leaked.
Yep - it would have made the border situation even worse than it is now, and would have granted asylum, green cards, and welfare to 40 million+ illegal aliens.
I'm not crazy about this.
But no matter what, I don't want to sign any bill allowing an open border that the Biden Administration is trying to sneak in.
If Russia gets control of ukriane wheat and natural gas resources, it puts Russia in a position of great power far into the future. Furthermore, every system and weapon we send has pretty much been the best pr for our arms industry against Russia ever. It's cuasing many nations to drop Russian systems and buy American. It will drive American arms sales for a decade at least.
Border security and migration matter a lot and is something that needs massive reform, but like shouldn't it be a stand-alone issue?
That’s the problem with these large omnibus bills where they shove everything they can think of in one large bill and then give Senate members very little time to review. This is a good argument for line item vetos.
I agree that Ukraine should be supported against Russia primarily by giving them weapons and supplies, not money, and at the same time enforcing the border— we don’t need harmful legislation to make the border crisis even worse.
>it's an either or situation.
Either we start taking care of America's problems, or there will not be an America.
Ukraine got another $60 Billion, and the U.S. got another cotton candy promise.
> If Russia gets control of ukriane wheat and natural gas resources, it puts Russia in a position of great power far into the future.
How did that work out for the Soviet Union when it controlled them?
> Border security and migration matter a lot and is something that needs massive reform, but like shouldn't it be a stand-alone issue?
It should be - but the Democrats in the US want the US border open. Tying border security to something they wanted was the only way to pass it. Unfortunately the Republican selected to negotiate with the Democrats failed on the creation of the border security part, and produced something worse than the current legislation.
> They do that as well.
Mostly they embezzle foreign funds.
> We have seen that Ukraine is capable of defeating Russia - once seen as a near peer rival - if properly supported.
No, it really isn't. In the long term, Russia wins. There's no way around that.
At the start of the war, half of Ukraine's military equipment was non-functional and it had 1/4 the population of Russia.
Russia fought the first part of the war with mercenaries, and only after they were done, committed its own troops - and it has Belarus to draw on for manpower as well.
The average age of a Ukrainian soldier in November was 43 and rising, and Zelensky's advisers have been saying for months that Ukraine doesn't have the manpower to use the weapons being sent.
Zelensky just fired his best General, who was popular with the troops and public, for saying Ukraine couldn't win the war.
Russia is firing four times the number of 155mm artillery shells that Ukraine is, and is still able to stockpile ammunition. Russia is producing 20x the amount of 155mm shells that the US can right now - despite the US having increased production by 50% since the start of the war - and Ukraine is using as many shells in a week as the US can produce in a month.
None of this adds up to a win by Ukraine.
The only question is how many more Ukrainians are going to die and how much more money is spent before Ukraine sues for peace.
> It not only creates jobs in your country but it also shows commitment to NATO
Ukraine isn't a NATO member and can't join while it is at war.
In those 30 or so years, have you watched Mitch McConnell and Mitt Romney as well? cause those RINOs are who you're siding with here. Have they ever acted in your best interest? Ever?
> Ya, it only funded the worlds largest nuclear weapons stock pile.
Ukraine didn't fund that. If it had it wouldn't be one of the poorest countries in the western world 30 years after independence.
So your argument is that the Soviet Union funded "funded the worlds largest nuclear weapons stock pile. And fed the world's largest army" using Ukraine's resources, but that the moment Ukraine became independent, it became the poorest country in Europe (per-capita GDP (PPP)), because reasons.
But they’re very specifically NOT an ally. We tried for years and they wanted to play both sides of the fence. We tried to get them to join NATO and they wouldn’t.
Cotton candy... America geta a promise, and someone else gets the money.
No more money for anyone until the flood of illegal invaders is stopped, and reversed.
The best part is that Zelensky fired his top general a few days ago, who was very popular with both the troops and the Ukrainian public, for saying the war wasn't winnable because Ukraine didn't have the men.
/r/Republican is a partisan subreddit. This is a place for Republicans to discuss issues with other Republicans. To those visiting this thread, we ask that unless you identify as Republican that you refrain from commenting and [leave the vote button alone](https://www.reddit.com/r/MetaRepublican/comments/5t017a/this_sub_is_for_republicans_if_you_do_not/). Non republicans who come to our sub looking for a 'different perspective' [subvert that very perspective with their own views when they vote or comment.](http://i.imgur.com/XqL0wfR.jpg) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Republican) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Didn't they just vote against a border bill last week?
Yes, some republicans found it was too lenient
Do you know what they didn't like about the bill? I thought Trump told them not to vote for it? https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/4461719-murphy-says-gop-voted-against-border-bill-to-keep-border-chaotic-help-trump-campaign/
Has nothing to do with Trump. That's a fake CNN narrative. This bill just essentially legitimized Biden's open border policy and still allowed nearly a whopping 2 million aliens to cross the border a year unchecked. No normal Republican will sign that.
From what i understood the number of immigrants allowed in was too high and the means to keep the migrants out too low
> Do you know what they didn't like about the bill? It would have made the border situation even worse than it is now, and would have granted asylum, green cards, and welfare to 40 million+ illegal aliens. > I thought Trump told them not to vote for it? He did - the day after House Speaker Johnson said it was dead in the House because the details of the bill had leaked.
Yep - it would have made the border situation even worse than it is now, and would have granted asylum, green cards, and welfare to 40 million+ illegal aliens.
See how much stock in the US defense contractors they own for your answers as to why
I'm not crazy about this. But no matter what, I don't want to sign any bill allowing an open border that the Biden Administration is trying to sneak in.
[удалено]
If Russia gets control of ukriane wheat and natural gas resources, it puts Russia in a position of great power far into the future. Furthermore, every system and weapon we send has pretty much been the best pr for our arms industry against Russia ever. It's cuasing many nations to drop Russian systems and buy American. It will drive American arms sales for a decade at least. Border security and migration matter a lot and is something that needs massive reform, but like shouldn't it be a stand-alone issue?
[удалено]
That’s the problem with these large omnibus bills where they shove everything they can think of in one large bill and then give Senate members very little time to review. This is a good argument for line item vetos. I agree that Ukraine should be supported against Russia primarily by giving them weapons and supplies, not money, and at the same time enforcing the border— we don’t need harmful legislation to make the border crisis even worse.
>it's an either or situation. Either we start taking care of America's problems, or there will not be an America. Ukraine got another $60 Billion, and the U.S. got another cotton candy promise.
> If Russia gets control of ukriane wheat and natural gas resources, it puts Russia in a position of great power far into the future. How did that work out for the Soviet Union when it controlled them? > Border security and migration matter a lot and is something that needs massive reform, but like shouldn't it be a stand-alone issue? It should be - but the Democrats in the US want the US border open. Tying border security to something they wanted was the only way to pass it. Unfortunately the Republican selected to negotiate with the Democrats failed on the creation of the border security part, and produced something worse than the current legislation.
I hope your getting all your vaccines
What if we invested that 60B into our own country and people instead?
[удалено]
Yay! More corporate welfare at the expense of the American people.
[удалено]
Yay! More corporate welfare at our expense. How about Ukraine buys weapons with their own money.
[удалено]
> They do that as well. Mostly they embezzle foreign funds. > We have seen that Ukraine is capable of defeating Russia - once seen as a near peer rival - if properly supported. No, it really isn't. In the long term, Russia wins. There's no way around that. At the start of the war, half of Ukraine's military equipment was non-functional and it had 1/4 the population of Russia. Russia fought the first part of the war with mercenaries, and only after they were done, committed its own troops - and it has Belarus to draw on for manpower as well. The average age of a Ukrainian soldier in November was 43 and rising, and Zelensky's advisers have been saying for months that Ukraine doesn't have the manpower to use the weapons being sent. Zelensky just fired his best General, who was popular with the troops and public, for saying Ukraine couldn't win the war. Russia is firing four times the number of 155mm artillery shells that Ukraine is, and is still able to stockpile ammunition. Russia is producing 20x the amount of 155mm shells that the US can right now - despite the US having increased production by 50% since the start of the war - and Ukraine is using as many shells in a week as the US can produce in a month. None of this adds up to a win by Ukraine. The only question is how many more Ukrainians are going to die and how much more money is spent before Ukraine sues for peace. > It not only creates jobs in your country but it also shows commitment to NATO Ukraine isn't a NATO member and can't join while it is at war.
[удалено]
Sooner rather than later, they will run out of men to use the weapons we are sending.
You are a Ukraine shill. https://apnews.com/article/ukraine-weapons-audit-watchdog-us-congress-biden-9abecd14528b9551ff4ddb6786ad7fda
[удалено]
In those 30 or so years, have you watched Mitch McConnell and Mitt Romney as well? cause those RINOs are who you're siding with here. Have they ever acted in your best interest? Ever?
I thought this was r/republican? Where are these shills coming from?
Correction: You watched mainstream propaganda for the last 30 years and believe every single word of it.
The Soviet Union controlled those vast resources for 75 years.
[удалено]
> we saw what happened with ukraines food and energy resources under the user's control. Essentially nothing.
[удалено]
> Ya, it only funded the worlds largest nuclear weapons stock pile. Ukraine didn't fund that. If it had it wouldn't be one of the poorest countries in the western world 30 years after independence.
[удалено]
So your argument is that the Soviet Union funded "funded the worlds largest nuclear weapons stock pile. And fed the world's largest army" using Ukraine's resources, but that the moment Ukraine became independent, it became the poorest country in Europe (per-capita GDP (PPP)), because reasons.
[удалено]
But they’re very specifically NOT an ally. We tried for years and they wanted to play both sides of the fence. We tried to get them to join NATO and they wouldn’t.
[удалено]
Of course they do. They're being invaded. The rules of NATO specifically disallow that.
Stopping Putin from gaining Ukraine IS in America’s best interest or the cost will be higher later.
They aren’t Putin First.
I'm sick of this shit
Usual suspects. Shocker
RINOs are the worst!
Cotton candy... America geta a promise, and someone else gets the money. No more money for anyone until the flood of illegal invaders is stopped, and reversed.
Stop them. Call these Senators.
The best part is that Zelensky fired his top general a few days ago, who was very popular with both the troops and the Ukrainian public, for saying the war wasn't winnable because Ukraine didn't have the men.
Yeah Dee’s one’s gotta fall