Evaluating the justification for USA’s aid to Ukraine

Argument
Some past few days, I met with my friends at a local pub, and we were chatting about current affairs in the nation when a TV show assessing the Russia-Ukraine war summarized the military aid USA has sent to Ukraine. We then had a moment of silence when the anchor stated that the USA has so far spent more than $ 30 billion in Ukraine since Putin annexed Crimea from Ukraine in 2014. The guest speaker in the show, a government critic, blamed the USA for spending billions of dollars on world affairs while neglecting its people. Just then, one of my friends, Issah, took his position, stating that the government has many needs that could be sorted with the money sent to Ukraine. My other friend, Tomlin, still focusing on the news, asserted his support for the US government in delivering lots of help to Ukraine. In other words, the topic of argument among my friends was the USA’s spending lots of cash on external parties. One party opposed the USA’s support of Ukraine, while the other supported the government’s aid to Ukraine and other nations, such as Taiwan and South Korea.
First, the function of this argument was different based on each party’s side. For Issah, he was about proving his dominance in the argument. Historically speaking, having known Issah for more than seven years, he always cherishes winning his arguments. To do this, he speaks loudly and, more often, denies the other party any chance of depicting their views. In this case, in particular, Issah spoke for more time when compared to Tomlin. Not that Tomlin never wanted a chance to air his views, but since he was frequently cut off while trying to speak by Issah. Additionally, his argument was to depict dominance since he gave his reasons from propaganda and not based on facts. When asked about the validity of his words, all he said was that we were naive in politics and that he had no further illustration to give. By confirming our lack of awareness in politics, I guess he was cornered and had no proper proof to support his arguments. For instance, at one point, he stated that Biden increased USA taxes so he could get enough cash to finance Ukraine’s hand in the war.
On the other hand, looking at Tomlin’s argument, he aimed to give knowledge to Issah. Tomlin is a history student and, at one point, interned at George H.W. Bush Presidential Library and Museum. Further, he has a high interest in world affairs and has always subscribed to lots of historical stories, even on YouTube. With that credibility, I suppose that all he wanted to do was to pass information to Issah concerning the state of the USA’s aid to Ukraine. His points were made up of facts, and in certain instances, he mentioned the Budapest Memorandum signed in 1994 by various nations, USA and Russia included.
I believe that the impact of the argument was informing people. At the start, I almost supported Issah due to his dominance in the process. He appeared to have strong points; nonetheless, when Tomlin started communicating, we all went silent and listened to history as it unfolded. It is from the argument that I also saw the justification for USA’s aid to Ukraine. In 1994, Ukraine gave all its nuclear weapons through Budapest Memorandum to Russia, and the USA signed the treaty that it would protect Ukraine whenever any state overlooked its sovereignty. Thus, the USA aiding Ukraine is part of history. Even Issah, seemed interested in wanting to know more, as his questions were frequent, and he ended up being more lenient to the government concerning its aid to Ukraine.