And in this case the US participation should come. Wouldn't be better to fight a Putin's Russia that was weakened in Ukraine? Perhaps weakened so much, that Putin's won't attack at all. Perhaps weaken so much, that the US can scale down its European military force deployment (saving money) and concentrate on other things (China).
So yeah, US investments in Ukraine directly benefit America. Ukrainians are fighting for Americans. So much so, that they are destroying Russia's nuclear weapons capabilities (destroying radars, strategic bombers, submarines and ships, weapons arsenal, ballistic rockets, carriers of nuclear weapons like Iskanders).
I’m not following your point, or maybe you missed mine. You said 100,000 Russian soldiers dead doesn’t make the US any safer, and I agree, but it does make Europe safer because there are fewer Russian soldiers. But then you compared the population of Russia and the EU to imply that Russia is no threat to Europe.
But that analysis is flawed, because the population of Europe isn’t one monolithic block that is guaranteed to respond to Russia with military force in such a way that a direct comparison of the numbers makes much sense. For example, what I mentioned already.
I think you putting words in my mouth. Quote me please. This was somebody else's statement
>"But that analysis is flawed, because the population of Europe isn’t one monolithic block that is guaranteed to respond to Russia"
And my answer was that if they do not they were just hiding behind the US all that time. If the EU will not fight for the EU then, well no need for me to continue..
>"And your reply was Ukraine is not in the EU"
This was in response to: "Will Germans accept being drafted to go fight in Ukraine". They (Germans) will most likely not accept and exactly for the reason that the Ukraine is not in the EU.
Ukraine is not in EU. As for the rest - if they don't then, well, they were just hiding behind the US with all the consequences.