

My god you’re dense. I’ve already explained everything clearly and twice so far. I’ll put it in very simple to understand words for you:
Trade Deficit = Deindustrialisation and Job Loss
Trade Surplus = Industrialisation and Job Growth
For someone who claims to have an understanding of macroeconomics, you clearly very much don’t. 🤦🏼
And I’ll reiterate: the Memorandum did not guarantee military support, and yet, we’ve been providing it for the last three years for free despite them breaking their own agreement and infringing on Russia’s border security. They poked the bear, FAFO’d. The only way Ukraine keeps their sovereignty is through diplomacy and, most likely, complete detachment from NATO.
And which other countries have benefited from far more, for decades.
We don’t even need a trade surplus, we just need to minimise the deficit gap. Too much reliance on foreign trade is weakening our own economy while strengthening others. Maybe be grateful that it lasted as long as it did.
You did say that, and I quoted it in my reply. Quit backpedaling.
Attacking Ukraine in self-defence is not violating the agreement. If you don’t see how having an opposing military alliance right on their border would be perceived as a security threat, idk what to tell ya. Especially when NATO gave assurances not to expand eastward past Germany. I recall the U.S. having similar concerns when Russia had a presence in Cuba.
Anyway, that was back before the US of A and Russia started becoming allies.
See, it’s that kind of ungrateful attitude that resulted in a complete halt on all aid to Ukraine. The U.S. provided ~%43 of the military support to Ukraine while no other country exceeded 6%. It would have been over in weeks if not days had we not supported them as much as we did. If we were such an “average” provider, the entire world wouldn’t be throwing a tantrum over it like you are right now.