What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Does the U.S. have a moral obligation to help defend Ukraine? (1 Viewer)

Does the U.S. have a moral obligation to help defend Ukraine?

  • Yes

    Votes: 11 16.2%
  • No

    Votes: 48 70.6%
  • Somewhere in the Middle

    Votes: 7 10.3%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 2 2.9%

  • Total voters
    68
Just curious why you’d frame based on morality? Isn’t the question strategic interest? Would you answer differently if that were the question?

 
I'm not following it. My kids are grown and i've given up on seeing the world have its head on right before i'm wormfood, so i stopped paying attention to anything where institutional heedlessness is a factor. Moral? If it's in our NATO treaties, yeah. Not otherwise. America will be an adolescent country and treated like suckers as long as it keeps grabbing checks.

 
possibly the most poorly worded poll evah

non-NATO so no duty to defend

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't even consider Russia an enemy. They have their own #### they deal with that doesn't really affect us day to day. The only time there's conflict is when it comes to the elites money. Then it's a squabble over who gets what. 

None of this affects us regular people. So if we have to send any troops over there to die for another meaningless conflict that doesn't protect the US in anyway, heads need to roll. 

 
Moral obligation?  No...

Cultural obligation?  Absolutely.....

THE problem that's been at the heart of this conflict is the battle over whether democracy works or not.  Russia has a vested interest in showing that it doesn't.  That is at the core of everything we see from them.  If one believes it's anything else (like money or geography etc) you haven't dug deep enough to understand the forces and motivations at work.

 
possibly the most poorly worded poll evah

non-NATO so no duty to defend
Yeah. Poll is fla\/\/ed.

I would say that the United States has a moral imperative to defend democracies against repressive authoritarian states. However, we can barely defend democracy domestically which seems a much bigger problem.

 
I don't even consider Russia an enemy. They have their own #### they deal with that doesn't really affect us day to day. The only time there's conflict is when it comes to the elites money. Then it's a squabble over who gets what. 

None of this affects us regular people. So if we have to send any troops over there to die for another meaningless conflict that doesn't protect the US in anyway, heads need to roll. 
I have issues with any country that tries to invade another country ( that we consider our friends)and install their puppet regime. 

 
If we don’t help them we will suffer even higher inflation due to higher oil, natural gas and food prices.  Russia is a big supplier of energy and the number one producer of wheat.  We will have to help feed and provide energy to Europe.  So no u,s. Soldiers, but no issue giving them arms to fight back against Russia.  

 
I have issues with any country that tries to invade another country ( that we consider our friends)and install their puppet regime. 
Unless the US is the one installing a puppet regime.  A good one that we can trust.  Then it’s all cool.  Hi Pinochet!

 
Just curious why you’d frame based on morality? Isn’t the question strategic interest? Would you answer differently if that were the question?
there are two questions, 1) morality and 2) "America's interests".

The morality question is more interesting to me.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I’m the lone undecided and it’s because I need more information before I could decide.  I think it’s way too complicated to give a yes/no at the moment.

 
The growing isolationist sentiment in this country, particularly among conservatives, is very depressing to me. 
It's interesting that the OP's question was on the basis of morality, versus say what's best for the nation and the world from a geopolitical stability perspective.

 
It's interesting that the OP's question was on the basis of morality, versus say what's best for the nation and the world from a geopolitical stability perspective.
Honestly, not sure why this is interesting unless you mean in a "wonder why they care about this morality thing all of a sudden" kind of way, and even then it's rather obvious, no?

 
lazyike said:
I have issues with any country that tries to invade another country ( that we consider our friends)and install their puppet regime. 


I am curious as to where you stand with the USA's actions in regards to Iraq and Afghanistan.

 
I don’t think we have a moral obligation to right every moral wrong around the world.
We have an obligation to try. And not just a moral one but a legal one as well. 

The United States signed both the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as well as the Atlantic Charter. Indeed, we participated heavily in the writing of all three documents, which serve as foundation for international law. In addition, at the War Crimes Trials in Nuremberg and Tokyo following the Second World War, the USA set down the principles that is supposed to guide moral behavior in international affairs. 
 

We are never morally obligated to go to war or use force to right any act of international immorality. But we ARE obligated to speak out, to take a stand, to help as much as we can. 

 
We have an obligation to try. And not just a moral one but a legal one as well. 

The United States signed both the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as well as the Atlantic Charter. Indeed, we participated heavily in the writing of all three documents, which serve as foundation for international law. In addition, at the War Crimes Trials in Nuremberg and Tokyo following the Second World War, the USA set down the principles that is supposed to guide moral behavior in international affairs. 
 

We are never morally obligated to go to war or use force to right any act of international immorality. But we ARE obligated to speak out, to take a stand, to help as much as we can. 
I guess it depends on what "help defend" means.  Speak out, take a stand, sure.  Send our troops - no way...at least, not under our flag.

This feels like something best left to the UN.  Is that still a thing?

 
We are never morally obligated to go to war or use force to right any act of international immorality. But we ARE obligated to speak out, to take a stand, to help as much as we can. 
Good points. I’m interpreting the question as defending militarily.

 
The Commish said:
Moral obligation?  No...

Cultural obligation?  Absolutely.....

THE problem that's been at the heart of this conflict is the battle over whether democracy works or not.  Russia has a vested interest in showing that it doesn't.  That is at the core of everything we see from them.  If one believes it's anything else (like money or geography etc) you haven't dug deep enough to understand the forces and motivations at work.
I mean they can just to point to the US if that was what they wanted to do.

 
The growing isolationist sentiment in this country, particularly among conservatives, is very depressing to me. 
Why?  We’ve screwed up dozens of other nations with our manipulation under the guise of fighting communism or “nation building.”

Immigration is a great thing.  Truly great.

Nation building?  Not so much.

 
Listened to this podcast over the weekend and it kinda swayed me to a no vote here. Logistically it's another nightmare, especially if some of our NATO partners bail and Cooper brings up an interesting option during the podcast to give everyone a way out. I don't think it happens and I think Russia invades but it's an interesting alternative. In short, give Russia the portion of Ukraine that is filled with Russians who want to be Russians and have Russia pay Ukraine billions for it for a few years.

Never happen but you don't know if you don't ask. Regardless, good podcast on the history of Ukraine and how we are where we are.

 
Moral? No way (IMO).

"In our interests" is a whole other question, but as a tax paying American (and one who cares about our troops, like I'm sure everyone else here does)....it pisses me off that pretty much every other country is willing to just take a backseat and let us handle it.

Plenty of other countries that could send in troops and dissuade a Russian attack. But most of them wont because they know America will foot the bill.

 
I feel like moral isn't the right word, so I voted no.

I believe we have an obligation, but it isn't morally so.  I feel morally obligated to defend the defenseless against abuse and suffering, but I don't think that is the case here.  There are political and financial issues at stake if Russia invades, but none of them rise to the level of a question of morality.

 
Moral? No way (IMO).

"In our interests" is a whole other question, but as a tax paying American (and one who cares about our troops, like I'm sure everyone else here does)....it pisses me off that pretty much every other country is willing to just take a backseat and let us handle it.

Plenty of other countries that could send in troops and dissuade a Russian attack. But most of them wont because they know America will foot the bill.
Not arguing with you, just asking the question, how much of that is due to us (US) inserting ourselves into so many conflicts since, say Vietnam, when we didn't need to? I think we do have a bit of a reputation out in the international community. We've also had our fingers in the innerworkings of Ukraine for a bit so maybe other countries are looking at this and thinking, it's your baby, you handle it.

Don't know, just spitballing  :shrug:

 
Not arguing with you, just asking the question, how much of that is due to us (US) inserting ourselves into so many conflicts since, say Vietnam, when we didn't need to? I think we do have a bit of a reputation out in the international community. We've also had our fingers in the innerworkings of Ukraine for a bit so maybe other countries are looking at this and thinking, it's your baby, you handle it.

Don't know, just spitballing  :shrug:


100% agree that in some respects...we brought this on ourselves.  And maybe Ukraine is a unique situation. But I have a hunch  that this scenario will continue to play out in plenty places where we DONT have previous involvement....until we say no more.

 
Why?  We’ve screwed up dozens of other nations with our manipulation under the guise of fighting communism or “nation building.”

Immigration is a great thing.  Truly great.

Nation building?  Not so much.
That depends on the nation and the effort put into the building. 
 

On my list of greatest political figures I just named Douglas MacArthur. He is responsible for the creation of modern Japan and South Korea. Those two states, who are our allies and have served us well in trade and friendship, would not exist if America hadn’t created them. 

 
I actually was thinking more in terms of joining other nations in sanctions, negotiations, military aid and support. 
When an international crime occurs, we absolutely have a moral and legal obligation to do these things, though the levels of sanctions and military aid are more fluid and depending on our national interests. 

 
Should the US, the world, sit back and watch innocent men, women and children that live in a free society and in the case of the US, an ally country, be slaughtered?   If it were me, and my family, would I want help or left to be murdered? 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
100% agree that in some respects...we brought this on ourselves.  And maybe Ukraine is a unique situation. But I have a hunch  that this scenario will continue to play out in plenty places where we DONT have previous involvement....until we say no more.
I feel like this is an opportunity but I'm also about 100% sure we won't. And not to the extent we say "good luck, you're on your own" more along the lines of we work with our allies in the area and make a go of it and for once, not being the lead. Let Poland or France lead, it's their backyard. Won't happen but I'd like to see Mr. Diplomat do some trick diplomat #### rather than send our troops into a shooting war with Russia.

That depends on the nation and the effort put into the building. 
 

On my list of greatest political figures I just named Douglas MacArthur. He is responsible for the creation of modern Japan and South Korea. Those two states, who are our allies and have served us well in trade and friendship, would not exist if America hadn’t created them. 
I'm trying to think of really any countries outside of those two who would be considered a success? Germany maybe? Good dig, if you had asked me I wouldn't' have even come up with those.

Should the US sit back and watch innocent men, women and children that live in an allied country be slaughtered?   If it were me, and my family, would I want help or left to be murdered? 
Hyperbole much?

 
I'm trying to think of really any countries outside of those two who would be considered a success? Germany maybe? Good dig, if you had asked me I wouldn't' have even come up with those.
It’s not an easy task for sure. BUT- in the recent cases of Iraq and Afghanistan we had the obligation to try. If we weren’t willing to try we shouldn’t have invaded those nations. Once you invade you have obligations. 

 
It’s not an easy task for sure. BUT- in the recent cases of Iraq and Afghanistan we had the obligation to try. If we weren’t willing to try we shouldn’t have invaded those nations. Once you invade you have obligations. 
Yea agree but those two examples are whole other discussions.

So saying that, you think we have an obligation in Ukraine? If so, how much and what kind of obligation? Obviously different situation then above.

Feel like a social studies teacher saying there is only one question on the test...with seven parts. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yea agree but those two examples are whole other discussions.

So saying that, you think we have an obligation in Ukraine? If so, how much and what kind of obligation? Obviously different situation then above.

Feel like a social studies teacher saying there is only one question on the test...with seven parts. 
I think we have an obligation to do what Biden is doing: warn Putin against invasion, sanction Russia if he does. 
 

But Ukraine is not the issue that concerns me. Taiwan is. We have told Taiwan in the past that if China invades we will go to war. Will we? Should we? That’s a far more difficult question than Ukraine. 

 
But Ukraine is not the issue that concerns me. Taiwan is. We have told Taiwan in the past that if China invades we will go to war. Will we? Should we? That’s a far more difficult question than Ukraine. 
Agree. So here's a question, China & Russia have been awful chummy lately. Even before I listened to the podcast I linked upthread I thought there was a better than average chance that if/when Russia invades Ukraine, China launches against Taiwan. What do we do? And how do we keep the world from becoming a charcoal briquette in the process?

 
Agree. So here's a question, China & Russia have been awful chummy lately. Even before I listened to the podcast I linked upthread I thought there was a better than average chance that if/when Russia invades Ukraine, China launches against Taiwan. What do we do? And how do we keep the world from becoming a charcoal briquette in the process?
This is a question that I do not have a good answer to. 

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top