Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Should We Be Providing ‘Charity’ to Ukraine?
In a recent speech, Rand Paul gave a powerful presentation regarding the millions of dollars we are giving to Ukraine. He likened our situation to a conundrum that Davy Crockett faced when he served in Congress. (Most of us perceive Crockett as an iconic symbol of the West, but he also served in Congress from 1827 to 1835.) And Paul told a story that speaks to our continual donation of funds and military equipment to Ukraine and how it extends a long, expensive, and debilitating process of trying to be generous to other countries under the guise of national security.
Although Crockett’s original speech was not transcribed, his ideas were captured in an 1867 article written by Edward Ellis and published in Harper’s Magazine, called, “Not yours to Give.” And the conclusions that Crockett reached challenged Congress’ intention to donate charity to the widow of a distinguished naval officer. He took his position from an encounter with a citizen who called him out for a similar funding decision that Crockett made in another devastating occurrence. Crockett was credited with the following description of the situation:
Several years ago, I was one evening standing on the steps of the Capitol with some other members of Congress when our attention was attracted by a great light over in Georgetown. It was evidently a large fire. We jumped into a hack and drove over as fast we could. In spite of all that could be done, many houses were burned and many families made houseless, and besides, some of them had lost all but the clothes they had on. The weather was very cold, and when I saw so many women and children suffering, I felt that something ought to be done for them. The next morning a bill was introduced appropriating $20,000 for their relief. We put aside all other business and rushed it through as soon as it could be done.
Later, when Crockett was out on the campaign trail, he encountered a citizen who had once supported him, but was going to withdraw future support for the recent action that Crockett had supported in Congress. The man, Horatio Bunce, shared his reasoning:
The Congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports to be true, some of them spend not very credibly; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from the necessity of giving by giving what was not yours to give. The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation and a violation of the Constitution. So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger for the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned and you see that I cannot vote for you.
Crockett took Bunce’s counsel to heart, thus denying Congress’ later efforts to provide charity to the naval officer.
* * * *
To be clear, I am ambivalent about our involvement in the Russia-Ukraine war. At this writing, our national debt is at $31,457,4472,102,309, or $94,292 per person. In how many different ways have we used federal funds to ingratiate ourselves to other nations, or to strengthen relationships with our allies, and managed to violate the Constitution? How many times have our intentions to be charitable to those in our own country violated the Constitution? Does our sympathy for the Ukrainians and the war inflicted on them by the Russians justify our apparent limitless funding to assist them? Is there any point where we have gone too far? Does the possibility of stricter oversight justify our borrowing even more money to fund our contributions to Ukraine?
Davy Crockett’s story begs the question: Do we know what we are doing in Ukraine?
[photo courtesy of Getty Images]
Published in Politics
Yes, Mis, we do get to impose conditions if we’re expected to provide aid.
You seem to want to give a blank check to one of the most corrupt regimes on the planet, and one that wants to take the side of the whole perverted, Woke, Rainbow Flag coalition.
I nominate you the most humor-challenged member of Ricochet.
Um, the name “The Ukraine” is what Russia calls Ukraine, like calling its capital “Kiev.” Ukraine calls itself “Ukraine” without the “The” and they call their capital Kiyv.
Calling Ukraine “The Ukraine” would be like calling France “The France” or calling Russia “The Russia” or calling Canada “The Canada.” It is simply not its name.
Does this answer what you wanted to know?
Mais c’est La France en français. (Et le Canada, if I’m not mistaken.) I think it may not be such a big deal. I mean it’s The United States, right?
And it is “The Bronx” and “The Ohio State University.” But there is no “The Brooklyn,” “The Utah” or “The Harvard.”
Saying “The Ukraine” is calling it by its Russian name. Call it by its Ukrainian name. Please do not do that.
What’s the American name? Can we use that one?
Yeah? How about that.
And what do we call that really cold country between Russia and Sweden? Or the country we nuked? Or that country that started WWII? I’m pretty sure they don’t get offended by the names we use.
The Ukraine wants to control our speech and be offended by our words, they’ve watched and learned our “woke” denizens and how to feign offense. I don’t play their games.
The Ukraine has been a part of Russia for hundreds of years. If they want to stay separate, they can earn it themselves.
They’re both English language terms. Neither of them are Russian or Ukrainian. It’s a bogus argument – everything doesn’t have to be a proxy for the conflict or a virtue signal.
This makes as much sense as telling me Chekhov was a Ukrainian writer appropriated by Russians, or that Gogol should be pronounced Hohol.
Feh, I say, and feh again.
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-18233844.amp
He was an officer on the Enterprise, for Heaven’s sake!
Let Californians know it’s not “The 10”, but just I-10.
This was an interesting conversation until the 3 AM altered mental status posts.
The Russians do not call the Ukraine ‘the Ukraine.’ There are no definite articles in the Russian language.
Actually it was the countries that started WW2- Germany and the USSR.
addendum- altho some here have the absurd notion it was started by the French & British…..and by the same faulty reasoning blame the Russian invasion on the US.
FWIW, in Arabic it’s The Ukraine.
Like The Sudan. And (in Arabic and sometimes in English) The Punjab.
[Now that I think of it, doesn’t Arabic give every country a definite article? Sneaky!]
In Arabic, is gender assigned to a country’s definite article as it is in French and German?
This could lead to all kinds of jokes, but I won’t go there.
Remembering all the times we asked you not to call people Election Deniers, and you did it anyway.
Funny how it was Kiev forever, until a little under a year ago, and then suddenly we were instructed that we must call it Kyiv.
What changed?
‘Kraine’ is simply ‘country’ in Ukrainian and ‘u’ is a preposition often meaning ‘in.’ In Russian, it means ‘borderlands ‘ implying a lawless region.
One is transliteration from Russian and the other from Ukrainian. They’re both pronounced the same in Russian and Ukrainian.
Word on the street is that the United States is going to provide Ukraine 30 Abrams M1 tanks and Norway is going to provide Ukraine 8 Leopard 2 tanks.
Ukraine could end up with 4 different types of tanks:
But what changed? Why did the media suddenly switch after using “Kiev” forever? People who couldn’t find Ukraine on a map a year ago (and maybe still can’t) are suddenly telling us how we MUST refer to the country or its capital.
And we still expect Russia to pretend we’re not the ones at war with them.
Slava Raytheon
And you probably think this matters.
All these different tanks require different support systems just further complicating things. There isn’t sufficient manufacturing capacity in any of the countries to supply what is needed in a real war, an industrial war, a war of attrition. But you’ll still be rah-rah as we go down in flames because of cumulative bad policy since the end of the Soviet Union.
Speaking of bad policy — the Russians are negotiating with the Taliban to buy weapons Creepy Joe left behind in Afghanistan.
Cool.
I thought it was called “Oh Canada”. Sometimes “Canada, Eh” in casual situations.
I heard James Biden was looking for a commission on the sale ;)
Because we are now using the correct language….