I support Ukraine, but even I remember when the name 'Ukraine' was only slightly less synonymous with corruption than 'Russia'.
So yes, I think Sen. Paul's desire to have oversight on US aid going to Ukraine was a reasonable request, and the only reason to oppose it is if people do not want anyone looking to closely at where that aid actually ends up.
You act like it's an option of having oversight on US aid, or letting Russia win.
"oversight" is not a magic word spell, and you are ignoring the counterpoint i've made that this is a time sensitive matter. Secondly, oversight is:
a) Supervisors, considering the nature of the matter, politically impossible.
b) Bureaucracy - less effective, efficiency degrading.
It is the wish of those mean Ukrainian nationalists like Azov and Right Sector, the more militant, Russia hating ones the more they care about it, to make sure the aid gets used to fight Russia. If they are even half as common and nasty as certain parties claim, that should be considered better supervision that most government spending in USA.
Which shows precisely why the oversight should be there; so people cannot use 'war-time hysteria' to paper over problems that should be addressed.
This line of thinking is how US military ended up with battlefield lawyers.
And if nothing else, don't you think it'd be good to make sure high end US/NATO tech isn't getting sold to the Russians, and have oversight mechanisms to ensure our tech meant to help Ukraine isn't instead lining the pockets of a corrupt supply clerk?
Great if you can do it without meaningful delays or other efficiency losses. Can you?
This kind of calculus requires a healthy leadership that can see a good future for themselves. Not ones who feel their days are numbered.
There is a difference between their days in power being numbered, and ensuring that their days in this world are numbered and suddenly getting shorter.
Also, if the leadership is decapitated it will be up to individual military commanders.
There is also precedence for it. When the USSR fell a bunch of suitcase nukes disappeared to unknown buyers
If it's going to be as much rumor mongering based as your chosen example, that's perfectly fine. Where did these rumored suitcase nukes shore up in use? It would be hard to miss a nuclear explosion... And if they don't get used, or better yet, can't be used, who cares?
What free people want to have a supreme court that tells them what is and is not the law? If they chose the court, what if they change their minds? The same argument many use against religious authorities also applies to secular authorities, the differance is that at least in theory if the religious government is doing the right thing, their laws are divinely inspiried so there is an extra reason to obey them. After all why should I give a damn what the majority, or what the strongest government says if I can get away with it? At least if it's a religious justification I can believe that God knows what is just and he can know and punish everything.
Well if their laws are divinely explained by what you consider a heretic/infidel god then they have to be bad by that logic.
There might be some that are indoctrinated like that. But what about the others who are simply young, in debt and bitches on the democrat plantation? Seriously there might be some there who owe money and think that the democrats are better for them financially, but not care for all that other crap? In that case a bribe would be the smart thing to do.
The problem with one-off bribes like that is that once they are delivered, then the bribe recipient is even less pressured to favor the giver than before. Which might be a reason for the lackluster bribe delivery on part of the DNC. Pay off 1/15 of their debt, they might feel a need to keep voting for them to get more 1/15's, pay off everything for them, they might show you the middle finger for they no longer need your favor.
Also the problem with colleges could be solved if we had free state run colleges, that could fire any teacher that went against the government. That way those that are anti conservative could be purged.
But that is not required to have political purges in colleges. The leftists did that just fine as things are, somehow
It may be expensive but education is becoming more needed in the past it was ok if the majority of the working population could not read, then an 8th grade education was needed, now we need 12. you don't think it's likely with advancing society and technology mandatory colleges won't be needed for many jobs?
College self-interest driven degree inflation is a thing.
How did a four-year degree become compulsory for nearly every job – and could the need to reboot the economy help tackle this problem?
www.bbc.com
Lawyers and leftist NGOs help and benefit on the sidelines, according to perfectly mainstream US center-right source.
The pernicious effects of degree inflation are obvious, as tuition and student debt rise and qualified workers arbitrarily lose employment opportunities. But the practice also flouts federal law.
www.aei.org
Naturally it's a bad thing, and it's a similarly mainstream point.
More employers are demanding college degrees for jobs that don't require college-level skills. That's bad news for the economy.
www.forbes.com
Meanwhile for similar and related reasons other parts of education are also getting inflated away, so what formally is 12th grade, now in practice cannot be assured to be worth anything once other factors create a rift between the bureaucratic reality of formal schooling and the practical results of it.
The largest, richest and most powerful country in the world is failing miserably at educating its youths.
thehill.com
What good is paper saying that student X had a whole lot of formal schooling and there is paperwork proving it, while in reality he can't do basic reading or math, which back some decades ago could at least be counted on regarding students with half as much time spent in the school system?
No, modern western property rights, would allow the family of traitors to retain their power and wealth.
What would happen if they turned out to be white nationalists instead?
See, the social and legal tools exist and are even being used to prove it, the problem is who and what for are they being wielded for.
Funny you know the Roman Empire was much more centralized than many of the tribes in Gaul, or Britannia, or Germania. Yet those barbarian tribes which were decentralized kept getting their ass kicked by the Romans. A strong centralized army with competent leadership will defeat divided squabbling groups. Divide and conquer exists for a reason. The west is not strong because "muh freedom" it's strong for other reasons, technology and luck of geography. An America that was a fascist dictatorship would also be a strong world power.
Of course the standards for social organization and needs put before it were different thousands of years ago.
Now "muh freedom", as was established, has quite a lot to do with the technology and "other reasons" for western world's successes. After all, China, with its STEM focused education, and massive, highly centralized country, and high IQ population, somehow still isn't the technological capital of the world (unless being the capital of stealing tech mostly from silly "muh freedom" countries counts).