Imagine the fate of a small country that didn’t receive the financial support of a stronger ally through grants, loans, & the guarantees of third-party loans to their wartime struggle of freedom from another, stronger adversary. 1/6
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
Now, the generous country wasn’t acting altruistically. Their rival was the country trying to suppress the weaker, smaller nation. By supporting the smaller nation, the generous country was securing its global position & ensuring its prosperity. 2/6
At the end of the conflict, the generous nation acted as the moderator of the peace treaty. They brought the two sides together to reach terms that were amicable & equitable for everyone involved. 3/6
Furthering their assistance to the small nation, the generous country forgave much of the war debt, and didn’t seek renumeration for its monetary support. It did so to give the small nation a chance to develop and thrive. 4/6
Could the small nation have won its struggle without outside support? Highly unlikely. It lacked the manpower and resources to field an effective army against the overwhelming force of its much larger adversary. In fact, it was beaten time and again in the early days of the conflict. 5/6
That small nation was the United States that was resisting the most powerful country in the world at the time, the British Empire. The U.S. flourished because of the generosity of 18th century France. So please don’t tell me that we don’t understand the Ukrainian position. 6/6
Comments