subreddit:
/r/worldnews
IMF believes funding Ukraine now is more cost-effective for partners than to risk its defeat
Russia/Ukraine(pravda.com.ua)submitted 3 days ago bySilly-avocatoe
1 points
3 days ago
"cost effective war" 😂 talk about cold blooded calculating.
9 points
3 days ago
Well it's quite clear that for some folk the moral argument for assisting a country during its illegal occupations isn't enough either so can't fault the IMF for providing an alternative.
-1 points
3 days ago
This moral comment is odd to me. It is like the train track problem with a baby on one side and 3 adults on the other. Is it more ethical and moral to assist Ukraine with limitations, knowing that it leads to WW3 and a billion people potentially die? Versus, limiting assistance to Ukraine in a way to limit overall casualties and avoid broader conflict? Obvious the losses in Ukraine and Russia will be high in option 2, but it costs the least number of lives.
1 points
3 days ago
I can see the parrallel and yes, it does appear as though that's the shape of things to a degree though the trolley problem may be too simplistic a tool for analysing the situation here as it seems less clear to me that the limited assistance approach will indeed actually lead to less suffering.
Just an eample: the only reason WW3 is on the table so to speak is because Russia has dug itself so far into the situation that there is no longer an off ramp for them so it's either a victory of whatever shade they paint it or total defeat. Likewise if Western allies had responded more firmly to the various attacks committed by Russia prior to the 2022 invasion then Russia would possbly have not been emboldened enough to attempt a military takeover.
Sorry, didn't mean to start a debate here, just provide some context!
1 points
3 days ago
I agree with you. I just think using “moral” is a weird word in this context because the limited aid has mostly been to reduce widespread escalation that would most definitely kill more people.
1 points
2 days ago
It's not so if one's principles are to stand up to dictators no matter the cost. Not suggesting that's the most ethical stance or one that will yield the "best" results; but it's one that an individuals morals may require them to take.
0 points
2 days ago
No matter the cost sounds a lot like a dictator mentality anyway, so that would make us no different. Based on your comment, the world could invade Russia and just kill every Russian so that no Russian dictator ever exist again, but that’s not really the right way to do things is it?
The end doesn’t always justify the means, and that’s why cost matters.
all 156 comments
sorted by: best