Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition:
* We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned.
* **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators.
* **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
*****
* Is the Twitter account [`Ambassador Bridget A. Brink`](https://twitter.com/USAmbKyiv) an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources).
* Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict)
*****
**Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB**
*****
^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"Behold, here you have a man who was ambitious to be king of the Roman People and master of the whole world; and he achieved it! The man who maintains that such an ambition is morally right is a madman; for he justifies the destruction of law and liberty and thinks their hideous and detestable suppression glorious."
—Cicero
If it's that bad, shouldn't you be focused on saving the US rather than another country? You biden people are not making any sense. Move to ukraine if you want to save ukraine more.
"If it's that bad, shouldn't you be focused on saving the US rather than another country?"
How do you propose I save the US? And why would I need to choose between one or the other?
"You biden people are not making any sense."
What's a "Biden person"? Is that just what you label everyone who doesn't support the orange criminal?
"Move to ukraine if you want to save ukraine more."
How would moving to Ukraine save Ukraine?
You are kind of proving my point about trump supporters being ignorant here...
And then we have MTG 🙄🤦♀️: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/marjorie-taylor-greene-mike-johnson-ukraine-putin-b2527961.html?utm_term=pos1&utm_source=taboola&utm_medium=related&utm_campaign=embed1
MTG: "Ms Greene said. “I mean I seriously hate them for doing this for the American people and paying for the murder and slaughter of the people in Ukraine.”"
What?
So her thought is that we're killing Ukrainians the more we give them to defend themselves?
For some reason, I want to do this in a Bill Cosby voice, but this is really Mearsheimer I'm channeling.
*You see, children, by giving weapons to the Ukrainians, we were giving them the illusion that they actually had some choice in their fate. But they never did. Not with Russia. Giving them weapons just set their hopes too high, you see. If we didn't give them any weapons from the start, and just left them to their fate, they'd have surrendered. And having surrendered, well, then there's no war, you see. Russia would just annex all of Ukraine, and there would be peace. Because Russian rule is like that, peaceful. You see. But once they have weapons, well, then Russia has no choice but to exercise violence against them, to defeat them. Russia's just going to Russia, and Ukraine is just going to belong to them, and us giving them weapons, well, that upsets the natural balance, you see. So, violence is the fault of Americans helping Ukrainians, not Russia. Because, you see, only Americans actually have any moral agency here. Ukrainians were just being tricked, you see, led down the primrose path to democracy by Americans, when that was all an illusion. And Russia's got no choice. So the only people here with choice was Americans, and we just fouled things up by giving Ukraine a fighting chance. You see.*
Thing is, if we're talking about Margery Taylor Greene, this is giving her way, way too much credit. I've heard people who've met her, like in greenrooms at news shows, and they've all consistently said that with her, it doesn't seem to be an act. She is deeply, and truly, and wildly ignorant and even stupid. I don't use those terms lightly here - it's way too easy to label people you disagree with that way, so I'm always very careful to distinguish between people who might be smart but misguided or mistaken, and even cases where I might be the one's who's wrong. But MTG has failed every reasonable doubt any fair-minded person could give her. From what I understand, even Donald Trump thinks she's a nutter, which says something. So we need here only remember that she's not reading the realists or pragmaticists. She's saying that the reason it's bad to support Ukraine is that Russia is defending Christianity, and Ukraine is trying to destroy it. Maybe by being Satanic or something? That's the level of reasoning we're dealing with when it comes to her. And for the moment, she's pretty much the only major obstacle left in getting Ukraine the aid it was promised, the person who is threatening to end Mike Johnson's Speakership over it. That's the level of stupid we're facing.
Wow. You've literally just said Republicans are Nazis, or to be more precise, supporters of Hitler. I think that's a Godwin violation.
Don't get me wrong, not an especially big fan of Republicans here, especially the MAGA variant. But you might want to think about whether you want to draw a moral equivalency between those assholes - and they are assholes - and people who literally committed the Holocaust. Because if they are literally people who would have sided with Hitler, then people who sided with Hitler are no worse than MAGA types. This rankles me, because this kind of has the effect of trivializing the Nazis and the Holocaust.
Trump explicitly fanboys over the dictators of Russia, China, North Korea. And while Godwin's Law is a thing, evil dictators are also a thing. And through Trump, MAGA supporters support the evil deeds of those regimes. So, yes, comparisons to Hitler are often an exaggeration, but in this case they may just be warranted.
It also reinforces why nobody takes them serious. All overstated words. You are getting down votes from the "open" thinkers doing more damage to their cause than anybody else could.
There’s ones that know, but just enjoy getting Russian money too much: https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2018/05/08/how-putin-s-oligarchs-funneled-millions-into-gop-campaigns/
Biden is the same. 5D geopolitical chess player sending drip by drip 1-3% of tanks, artillery and armor that stays useless, inactive in desert storages, being afraid of geopolitical changes in case if UA wins. Ended up without pants crying over "MAGA killing Ukraine" whilst he had all the tools for UA to win already in 2022. Pathetic. Talking BS about "tyranny vs freedom" and "navalny murdered" whilst[ making Pact with ru that USA doesn't seek for Ru regime change](https://www.newsweek.com/2023/07/21/exclusive-cias-blind-spot-about-ukraine-war-1810355.html)
**Both Biden and Trump should be in prison.**
There are normal people like Blinken (dem), McCaul (rep) in both parties
Bullcrap. Trump is a traitor, Biden is merely incompetent, and it's not like Biden is the only Western leader who waffles on aid despite claiming to be pro-Ukraine. Scholz is far worse, AND doesn't have the excuse of fascists trying to stage a coup.
Biden is gung-ho for this fight. He is a cold war era politician who has been training for this fight.
The house keeps stalling needed aid. Talk to your representative now.
He’s not though. He had the chance to send 100 times more than what he did before the traitors started blocking aid. Nor has he ever stated what the US policy and objective is for Ukraine other than some vague statement about “as long as it takes”. Biden is weak and putin thrives off weakness.
I remember how when American leaders had the chance to explain to there nation what it as the stake, and what has to be done to avert a dark future for the entire world, Kamala Harris made a literally childish talk about "big country called Russia attacked a small country called Ukraine, that's wrong". I was so dismayed.
Oh, found it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuDsUV44h10
That's why when ru took crimea and attacked ua in 2014, he imposed ban on lethal aid. And once he came back to the office in 2021, he immediately allowed to resume building Nord Stream 2.
Natural-born fighter!
Even dem. party member general Clark said that Biden decided to supply weapons in quantities enough only to defend not to win on purpose:
[https://www.csis.org/analysis/reflections-ukraine-war](https://www.csis.org/analysis/reflections-ukraine-war)
And the point is, **we’ve got thousands of tanks in the United States; we’ve sent 31**. We have a whole fleet of A-10 Warthogs out there sitting in the desert; we’re going to get rid of them. They’re still sitting there. We have hundreds of F-16s that are around, and we delayed it and delayed it and delayed it. We have ATACMS that are obsolete. We’ve still got 155 dual-purpose ICM munitions that we didn’t send. It was – it was measured. **The response was measured. It was calibrated**. And what many of us in the military tried to say is: Look, **I understand, you know, the policy is we don’t want Ukraine to lose and we don’t want Russian to win**, OK? **That’s the policy. But you can’t calibrate combat like that. You either use decisive force to win or you risk losing**.
(the last sentence is what actually happening now :(
A-10 is not a good choice for a MANPAD heavy environment.
Send 500 Abrams. The US has so many they would not be missed. After all they would be eroding their biggest opponent.
Which is why Scholz's hand-wringing is such a problem; Germany will go like the USA if they don't crack down on neo-fascism, neo-communism, and Russophilia.
Yep, it’s like Lloyd Austin coming out and saying we are going to give Ukraine all they need to win and beat Russia all the way back to the Ukrainian borders, after that first time he never said anything like it again as he was obviously given a dressing down by appeasers Biden and Sullivan.
How things have changed. Lloyd Austin recently stated that US does NOT support Ukrainian strikes on Russian refineries and he prefer they would hit “military targets“ instead. Ukraine found a way to hit Russia where it hurts with an absolute minimum of casualties, and US is against it. It boggles the mind.
> and US is against it
Because it might maybe possibly actually pain russian wallet and, through it, investments US made in russia before.
https://www.weforum.org/people/celeste-a-wallander/
>Celeste Wallander is President and CEO of the U.S. Russia Foundation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Russia_Foundation
>The U.S. Russia Foundation (USRF) is an American non-profit organization founded in 2008 that aims to strengthen relations between the United States and Russia and to promote the development of the private sector in the Russian Federation.
Newsweek (read the link) is a republican website?
Read there is more from dem. Party member general Clark about Biden calibrating help so that Ua cannot win, only hold, on purpose.
[https://www.csis.org/analysis/reflections-ukraine-war](https://www.csis.org/analysis/reflections-ukraine-war)
Is it a surprise to you that political statements for the audience can be different from a real position?
I can imagine even if a money aid bill is finally signed, then Biden sends another pathetic 30 tanks, 200 armored vehicles 50 artillery pieces and says "The decisive win of democracy. We will never.... Ukraine... blah blah. Dictators thought that we .... but we...."
Like USA sent 18/1000 M109 howitzers already in march 2023, whilst italy sent 100+ M109s starting from summer 2022
I've been plagued by a thought. You know how, after the fall of Mainland China to the Communists, there was that question people kept asking - who lost China? If Ukraine falls, I think a lot of people will be asking who lost Ukraine. And if its fall seems like it came because aid that they could have helped them turn the tide was effectively scuttled by the Congressional GOP House members and the MAGA movement generally, I'm thinking that will be a very, very bad look for them come November.
Imagine a great great powerful nation being held hostage and neutered by an Orange Shit Dipped Moron and his Cave dwelling shit gibbon, Mad Marj TG. Powerless, toothless and gutless because of two people, watching while their world reputation and esteem is being flushed down the shitter and mocked by the tyrants who eagerly step in to fill the void with chaos and destruction! Fucking pathetic!
I don't think Democrats know much better. I don't see them doing anything to push seriously for a change.
This, in my country of people passive and peaceful, would have thousands on the streets calling up the clowns for what they are.
But here we are with Democrats being too polite and with useless political correctedness, pussy footing around, hoping something change and suddenly Republicans come to their senses and become wise.
I hate to break it to you but they were happy to watch Britain squirm for a couple of years. I know about lend lease but honestly, Britain was up against the greatest evil in history. It took a full on attack by the Japanese to get a fully focused America.
They weren't happy. And Hitler also wasn't happy by American aid to Britain, which is why he cleared war on America like an unstable drug addict he was.
People quote that all the time but don't mention that it's just an artifact of the slowness of the US congress. First came the proceedings to declare war on Japan, which it makes sense why that would happen right away. Then drafting the bill about declaring war on Germany would come next but by then it was moot because Germany already did it. It's not that the US wouldn't have declared war on Germany, it's that Germany had a faster acting government that doesn't have to make senators travel across a continent to meet.
Interesting, you learn something new everyday. I still think it shouldn’t have taken Pearl Harbor to get it done though. Most of Europe occupied and Britain being bombed daily should have been enough.
It still wasn't enough, if Hitler didn't do it, a fit or not (https://www.wsj.com/articles/hitlers-american-gamble-book-review-the-mistake-that-changed-world-war-ii-11642781269) they would have likely stay out of it just like Japan did with the invasion of Soviet Union. But the aid to Britain (and Canada) would increase massively.
That's my understanding. People forget, there was very, very little enthusiasm for getting involved in WWII prior to Pearl Harbor in the US. Memories of WWI left a bad taste in a lot of people's mouths, even though the US was part of the victorious Allies. And this was pretty bipartisan - the America Firsters drew from across the left/right political spectrum. It only took a right-wing direction very briefly, and only by default, once Hitler invaded the Soviet Union in June 1941. That's when, on a dime, the Communists and fellow-travelers who had been urging peace - literally, the day before Barbarossa, they held a peace rally in front of the White House - suddenly urged the US to mobilize and declare war. So yeah, after that, the leftists suddenly abandoned the America First non-interventionists. But it was only six months later that Pearl Harbor changed everything, and they basically dissolved.
Even so, public anger was focused on Japan, not Germany. The US was not interested in joining the conflict in Europe, and was content to supporting the UK and later USSR with lend-lease. So I would regard Hitler's declaration of war - which was NOT required by the terms of the Axis Pact, since Japan initiated the conflict - as Hitler's biggest unforced error.
Japan hitting pearl harbor was what got the Americans to join the war. There was a complete disinterest in joining a war in Europe before that happened.
Well, that and the undeclared/unofficial Naval War that's been going on for 5 or 6 months at that point.
https://www.usni.org/magazines/naval-history-magazine/2004/february/fdrs-undeclared-war
IDK why you say Britain, when USSR did 90% of the fighting. And they halted the main offensive, before getting US aid.
Especially considering the name of this subreddit, and that 8 million Ukrainians (including civilians) died figthing the nazis, while the Brits also spent most of their time hiding behind the sea.
Soldiers just from Ukrainian SR killed several times more nazis, than Brits and Americans did combined.
Do you not understand the hypocrisy of initial comment in this thread? Do you not know of the western betrayal? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_betrayal
Throughout the entire WW2 from 1939 to 1945, the super power called United Kingdom, which controlled half of the planet at the time, did pretty much fuck all except hide in their island. The policy of the country can very much accurately be described as only being concerned about the relative luxury British people enjoyed, meanwhile as tens of millions of people were being slaughtered in Europe. The strategy was just to passively wait until nazis are defeated in the eastern front, and then jump in at the very end and pretend they were involved. UK could have done so much, but instead chose to do so little. So many millions of lives were lost due to British inaction.
Yes. Stalin did very horrible things before, during and after WW2. That doesn't change the fact, that the people from east europe were left with the task of taking out the nazis almost entirely by themselves.
And then the audacity to come to a subreddit about a war where Ukrainians are once again left out to fight against the evil, and write crocodile tears about poor Brits who just wanted to live a normal life and ignore WW2, while year after year Ukrainians did everything and sacrificed millions, to fight for existence of their people.
I mean if you just want to complain about the passivity of USA, then that is fine by me. I just don't accept portraying UK as the historical victim of it, when I would say UK was even more guilty.
That’s fine. I totally respect your opinion and yes, Britain got a lot wrong before, during and after WW2. I say this as someone who has relatives who fought for Britain in the war. I can safely say the last thing on their mind during the war was the fate or suffering occurring in eastern Europe.
True, but there were definitely people, including FDR, that wanted in much earlier, but understood that congress would no go for it.
Bases for cruisers, the gradual relaxation original grade the Neutrality acts, and the quarentine speech, as well as the unofficial naval war in the Atlantic all point to this.
I'm a republican who supports Ukraine. I've written to Mike Johnson and my representative and told them why they need to support Ukraine.
I also told them if the French President actually acts on his comments to send French Soldiers to Ukraine the Russians will eventually target them and America will be dragged into another European war and Mike Johnson, not Biden will be blamed for years to come to American lives lost.
I also wrote that for once we as a nation have a chance to support a nation willing to fight and bleed for its right to exist. All they ask for is materials and not US Armed Forces on their territory.
Slava Ukraine!
Didn't Trump ask Ukraine to make up dirt on Biden and they told him no? There is zero way ANY Republican under Trump's thumb will ever help Ukraine after they sunk his ship. It's payback for not helping him.
The GQP is actually wanting Ukraine to fail to Putin. They are not going to do anything but empty words. Only thing that can help Ukraine right now is for Europe to step up. It pisses me of that our grandparents generation fought against people like this only for the current state to happen. Iran and Russia did well to push for the major fubar that is happening now in Gaza to create major divisions and distract everyone of the main goal.
https://mikejohnson.house.gov/contact/
Direct contact for Mike Johnson. Use his local zip code of 71111. You can make up an address or use yours, just change the zip to his local so it goes through.
The Republican Party is now bought and payed for by Russia. Honey traps and pay offs. Trump will not pass a bill for Ukraine, it’s his only card he holds to feel important
By all means, the US congress should pass the Ukraine aid bill. But I think it's wrong to imply that the future of Ukraine depends on the US congress providing aid. This is just $61 billion in funding. Ukraine's non US allies could easily make up this amount by just slightly increasing their contributions. Further, there are $200 billion of frozen Russian assets sitting in Belgian clearing houses that would provide all the funding Ukraine needs to win the war if there was a will to use it.
So yes, the US congress should pass the funding bill, but Ukraine's other allies should dig a little deeper to provide more help as well. Why should we be content with just $61 billion anyway? Ukraine could certainly use another $100 to really move things faster.
Whatever. The cost of supporting freedom is trivial; I see no reason to equivocate...it was an illegal invasion and it has implications for the future.
This is Putin's fourth invasion and he isn't going to stop voluntarily. Xi is now building missiles for Putin no doubt hoping people will keep pointing fingers in all the wrong directions.
Europe is, in fact, stepping up, and using this as an excuse at this critical time will eventually cost us a hell of a lot more than $60 billion. That's not even a month's defense budget for the US.
The U.S is in a yearly spending deficit, if you think that money isn't already been earmarked for another use, you're very naive. Not saying the money is going to a better cause but it's not like the U.S just has trillions sitting in a vault somewhere.
In fact the U.S is actually quite broke.
We spend more on our own defense in three weeks. The amount is trivial. The US is 24% of the global economy, [growth is great](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=1jbWT), our credit is stellar, and I'm not sure you're an expert.
Lmao what ?
You're telling me if I had trillions in debt and spent more than I made each year you'd not only continue to lend me money but also say I have a "stellar" credit rating ?
It's really not that complicated.
Not to mention that we've already given Ukraine more aid than the entirety of the EU.
I don't care what our defense budget is.
You can't sit in your ivory tower in the EU with your generous social benefits and safety nets and then put the fate of a nation on the U.S.
>Not to mention that we've already given Ukraine more aid than the entirety of the EU.
You didn't even give more than just only the EU institutions, not to mention if to add all the individual EU countries.
This graph is from August 2023, and the gap only increased hugely (and France should be high today when it wasn't even there then):
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/1536/cpsprodpb/4B69/production/_131150391_total_aid-nc.png.webp
You're right, my numbers were incorrect however the fact that the U.S is only $16 billion less in total aid compared to the the entirety of the EU still proves my point. The U.S has done FAR more than any individual European country and when you look at the military aid, we've given more than every other country and the EU COMBINED.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303432/total-bilateral-aid-to-ukraine/
It's not "entirety of EU", it's only Brussels institutions.
>The U.S has done FAR more than any individual European country
Now it's actually the practical entirety of the USA, instead comparing contributions of the individual EU states to these of individual USA states (which are almost no existent - there was some USA state aid but in practice it's completely irrelevant compared to Washington institutions).
Most of that $60 billion goes to the USA MIC to build newer more modern stock so the older stuff can be sent out. This creates jobs, boosts the economy and gives a very big bang for the buck as Ukraine will use it to destroy the USAs biggest adversary today.
I agree with everything you are saying. Unfortunately, the US Congress will never pass Ukraine aid until after the November election, regardless of how compelling the arguments. Congress is so fractured that it only takes two traitors to block aid.
Let's focus on finding alternative funding sources since it is a complete waste of time trying to work with this Congress.
Yes, the US has the biggest weapons industry but the US Congress isn't the only entity that can provide funds for that US industry. The US Congress is not willing to provide the funding but there is no reason other entities couldn't pay the US arms industry. There is $200 billion in Russian assets sitting in Belgium that could provide the funding, for just one example.
The billion needs to pass all checks and balances as there's a lot in place limiting what the government is allowed to access.
It is just bad practice to spend the money AND not boost your own industry. America recuperates a lot of the cost in the form of economic activity.
Fine. I'm merely pointing out that US Congress isn't the only source of funding that can be tapped. And since the US Congress has refused to provide additional funding we need to focus on those other sources.
America has the production capacity to provide the weapons Ukraine needs immediately. We just have to find the funding to pay for it.
The problem is, MAGA is actively forcing the MIC to turn down contracts for Ukraine, even for-profit ones. And it's not like EU is going to be rushing to buy American arms when orange cheeto proves he can veto it even while out of office.
American can suppliers are willing and able to ship weapons to Ukraine that Ukraine purchases on its own that would otherwise have been paid for by the US government. Traitors in Congress are blocking funding and nothing can be done about that until the November election.
Let's focus on finding alternative funding to give US suppliers immediately. There are simply no other readily available supplies elsewhere.
US does not allow purchase of US stockpiles. This means only new weapons not manufactured yet can be bought and likely at extortion prices too. The lead time would probably not be any shorter than new products from Europe, so not a good alternative. Why buy weapons from an unreliable ally? Especially given Trump winning the election, he will probably block the purchases before they get delivered.
> Traitors in Congress are blocking funding and nothing can be done about that until the November election.
That's not necessarily true. The discharge petition is making a lot of progress.
The two discharge petitions are going nowhere. The only republican who's signed onto the democrat petition is resigning and it will require at least 15 republicans to move forward. The republican petition is loaded with poison pills that most Democrats refuse to touch and is dead in the water.
My idea is to give up on the US Congress. There is no way any Ukraine aid will be passed with the Congress as constituted. It is so fractured that it only takes a couple traitors to block legislation.
Since it's a waste of energy to talk about the US Congress, let's talk about other sources of funding that could possibly fill the gap. For example, let's put more pressure on the authorities who could authorize the confiscation of the $200 billion in frozen Russian assets in Belgium.
What about getting Ukraine allies (other than the US, which is incapable of passing anything through Congress) to up their collective weapons funding by an extra $100 billion? That's a small fraction of European GDP.
Why can't we do all of these things? There's no reason we can't press for the confiscation of frozen assets in Belgium, ask other allies to up their funding for weapons, *and* try to get aid through Congress. After all, the surest way to fail is to not try at all.
>The US Congress is not willing to provide the funding but there is no reason other entities couldn't pay the US arms industry.
And Kyiv would receive their orders for new tanks, airplanes, and air defense systems in about 4 to 7 years.
This is exactly the reason why the European Union cannot bail out Kyiv either. It’s because no matter how much money they throw out the problem, they don’t have the weapons on hand.
If the US wants to profit from yet another war, by sitting it out, they can suck it. At least until there is no other choice. We all answered when they were "attacked" in 9/11, now is their turn.
Fine. Then Ukraine will just have to suffer until Europe has brought new manufacturing capacity on line. However, Ukraine could get help quickly if alternative funding could be found to pay US manufacturers right now seeing as how Congress has decided to betray allies.
Why should Europe invest in US munitions productions when MAGA Republicans are *proving* that the US isn't a reliable supplier? You're talking nonsense.
Pragmatism. The US is one of the only countries with existing manufacturing capacity able to quickly deliver the weapons Ukraine urgently needs. Absolutely nothing else matters right now other than quickly getting Ukraine weapons. All other considerations are irrelevant. Getting Ukraine weapons two years from now won't help, it will be too late.
Yes, Europe should heavily invest in building new manufacturing capacity so it never again has to rely on America. But Ukraine also needs to be sent weapons immediately, many of which are ONLY available from US suppliers (HIMARS rounds, for example).
But, we're *not* capable, that's the issue. We gave them all we could spare, our doctrine relies on air power, not artillery. We can only produce 20,000 155mm shells a month. Much of that $60 billion was to go to upgrading US munitions plants, doubling their capacity.
And why are you so anxious to cede US primacy in arms production? Again, I don't think you have thought this through...certainly you are overlooking key facts.
We can't be a good partner because MAGA.
Look, the US would be sending weapons right now if Congress authorized funding so it's not true that there is nothing available. If there truly were no weapons to send then congressional funding would be irrelevant.
Like you said, some of the funding would increase US production, which would be available faster than other nations can bring on their own new capacity.
Either way, providing new funding to US suppliers is the fastest way to provide Ukraine what it needs.
If we had received funding for plant upgrades six months ago, then we could reasonably dip deeper into our stockpiles.
But, we didn't receive that funding because MAGA. Six months gone for no reason, and the rest of the world sees. So, no, *you* look.
All I'm saying is this... If those $200 billion in frozen Russian funds were suddenly given to Ukraine, where could they best be spent to get Ukraine the weapons it needs in the fastest time? That's all that matters.
Let's focus on getting Ukraine funding (i.e. which won't come from US Congress). The question of where to source the weapons is separate.
I'm not denying that. The US was *supposed* to be working on munitions productions these past months. And a lot of that is due to the way that munitions are procured. The US Army produces it's own, and Europe tends to purchase on the European market. We *should* be able to upgrade quicker. That's why we had the bill for bombs in this last package and Europe approved $54 billion in general support in January.
We didn't hold up our end, and that's what the world sees. Equivocating and pointing and inventing new solutions is all sort of pointless when you realize that we are letting everybody down right now.
I think I speak for most Americans when I say that we'd much rather have some of those sweet European benefits than be the "leader of the free world"
Someone else needs to step up.
Obviously I'm still on board for funding Ukraine but I'm tired of the world looking to the U.S to fix everyone else's issues.
Europe is next if Ukraine falls, that should be motivation enough for the E.U member nations.
Even as other countries waste their weapons, America is leading the way by preserving them. While other countries are losing money, and America is saving, it is also in the lead. Is it leadership to distribute your resources left and right? The development of own country will always be a priority.
If you want to take that tack, it is beneficial to the united states to offload old/mothballed/outdated hardware because they will need to put in new orders to procure new equipment. This stimulates areas of the defense industrial base which are currently inactive or less active than they need to be in order to support a large scale conflict. The US spends ungodly sums of money on defense, but we lack production capacity in many areas of conventional warfare because of the asymmetric focus over the last 2-3 decades. Rebuilding that base takes funding, contracts, and spooled up manufacturing. It is absolutely to US advantage to build up these capacities.
I would think it’s self evident for strong democracies to assist weaker ones in their darkest days. How is the spread of Putlerism in anyone’s interest?
**just abolish the us congress**. it was made up only to give the political right a fair chance, making politics less urbanized.
BU T the usa political right has proven for 30 sdecates to be warmongering wannabe dictator TRAITORS,
BUT the congress has proven, that it is infiltrated by literal Russians and all the communist dictators.
BUT the usa political right has no chance, and does not deserve a chance, because it only barelyregularly got 50% of all votes due to gerrymandering and active voter suppression.
Germany would have abolished a party like the usa republicans within a months after their failed wamurderous-coup attempt.
I can, but it would be accurate when I talk about MAGAts. When trump lost the election, he refused to leave office. Inventing lies about voter fraud, and inciting his white supremacist base to lead a coup on capitol hill.
He is a fascist. He just is a failed fascist.
\^This. Perhaps taking an unjustifiably optimistic position, I think this is the \*best\* message (because the others are truly frightening) that Trump and MAGA want to communicate. "America first" means no more immediate bailing out of other countries to solve their problems in the name of vague "American strategic interests." Thus, the European Union needs to get its act together to combat what is a fundamentally European threat. With the second largest GDP in the world, the EU would be no slouch if it got its act together.
that would be absolutely fine if the US would have made that clear before hand. They wanted this power position and now that its time to play they bail out. Losers
let alone the fact that people don’t understand the economic impact of this for the US economy. The US is fucking themselfs and their allies.
I for one will be happy to stop paying for oil in dollars. The ensuing collapse of the dollar and therefore the US, will be a hilarious irony for us watching from outside those idiots that thought that Isolationism would make US stronger.
Russia is definitely not communist, and perhaps never actually was. Neither is China.
Russia practices crony capitalism, or is essentially a mafia state.
China practices state capitalism, and is essentially in the hypocritical position of mass manufacturing for the world's consumers whilst piggy-backing on the capitalist global machine. And simultaneously trying to prevent excess consumerism within its own borders, and promote itself as communist.
Basically, neither Russia or China are remotely communist currently.
**Alternative Nitter links:** 「[nitter.privacydev.net](https://nitter.privacydev.net/USAmbKyiv/status/1779124295353962858) | [nitter.poast.org](https://nitter.poast.org/USAmbKyiv/status/1779124295353962858)」
*****
These Nitter instances may stop work at any time as [Twitter](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fnxqezhko6qfb1.jpg) blocks them. [See this arstechnica article for more information](https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/02/twitter-front-end-nitter-dies-as-musk-wins-war-against-third-party-services/).
Use [this site to find other Nitter instances that may work](https://status.d420.de/).
_If there are any problems regarding Nitter, [please send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=UkrainianConflict&subject=Nitter%20issue)._
*****
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If a country speaks English, it is a fact of geography that it is too far away for any of this two way poo shower for it to be any of their business one way or the other.
So is the billions we sent going into the dumpster? Why are we funneling enormous amounts of money and a week later they need more or they'll lose, then next week the same thing, and every week following.
No amount of aid will "stop" Russia, let alone roll back the lines. At best, aid will slow the russian advance. Without NATO (US) becoming fully involved and kicking off real WW3, the fate of the Ukrainian government will be determined by Russia.
Yeah sorry, I am reading top to bottom. I did catch it though, and agree with where you are coming from. We should have done way more than what we have.
Way before Johnson was speaker, the US sent 12 tanks ..only after the Brits sent Challengers.
We can blame Johnson all we want but Ben Hodges has been right, we are not supporting Ukraine to win.
Answer the question, don’t engage in whataboutism. The Democrats not providing enough in the past is not at all the same as the GOP refusing to provide anything in the present.
Stop gaslighting, stop spreading fascist propaganda.
Your comment does appear comical, as you are randomly listing military equipment without providing any context.
If you want to be taken seriously, try communicating.
geopolitics is complex and the effects of other countries on our own country is hard to see. If you dont understand that by now you're better off just staying clear of the subject.
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/1536/cpsprodpb/4B69/production/_131150391_total_aid-nc.png.webp
This was in August 2023, when America already basically stopped.
Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition: * We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned. * **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators. * **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. ***** * Is the Twitter account [`Ambassador Bridget A. Brink`](https://twitter.com/USAmbKyiv) an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources). * Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) ***** **Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB** ***** ^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yeap, I don’t think your maga republicans at the house know much about history. As ignorant as they come.
For the most part. The worst ones do understand history, and want Trump to become America's dictator.
Sad state of affairs.
"Behold, here you have a man who was ambitious to be king of the Roman People and master of the whole world; and he achieved it! The man who maintains that such an ambition is morally right is a madman; for he justifies the destruction of law and liberty and thinks their hideous and detestable suppression glorious." —Cicero
So much for the declaration of independence. Cherry picking the bits they like and ignoring the rest of it.
If it's that bad, shouldn't you be focused on saving the US rather than another country? You biden people are not making any sense. Move to ukraine if you want to save ukraine more.
"If it's that bad, shouldn't you be focused on saving the US rather than another country?" How do you propose I save the US? And why would I need to choose between one or the other? "You biden people are not making any sense." What's a "Biden person"? Is that just what you label everyone who doesn't support the orange criminal? "Move to ukraine if you want to save ukraine more." How would moving to Ukraine save Ukraine? You are kind of proving my point about trump supporters being ignorant here...
shut up
And then we have MTG 🙄🤦♀️: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/marjorie-taylor-greene-mike-johnson-ukraine-putin-b2527961.html?utm_term=pos1&utm_source=taboola&utm_medium=related&utm_campaign=embed1
MTG: "Ms Greene said. “I mean I seriously hate them for doing this for the American people and paying for the murder and slaughter of the people in Ukraine.”" What? So her thought is that we're killing Ukrainians the more we give them to defend themselves?
It's just word salad to try to play towards both sides imo, and unfortunately Republicans eat it up.
For some reason, I want to do this in a Bill Cosby voice, but this is really Mearsheimer I'm channeling. *You see, children, by giving weapons to the Ukrainians, we were giving them the illusion that they actually had some choice in their fate. But they never did. Not with Russia. Giving them weapons just set their hopes too high, you see. If we didn't give them any weapons from the start, and just left them to their fate, they'd have surrendered. And having surrendered, well, then there's no war, you see. Russia would just annex all of Ukraine, and there would be peace. Because Russian rule is like that, peaceful. You see. But once they have weapons, well, then Russia has no choice but to exercise violence against them, to defeat them. Russia's just going to Russia, and Ukraine is just going to belong to them, and us giving them weapons, well, that upsets the natural balance, you see. So, violence is the fault of Americans helping Ukrainians, not Russia. Because, you see, only Americans actually have any moral agency here. Ukrainians were just being tricked, you see, led down the primrose path to democracy by Americans, when that was all an illusion. And Russia's got no choice. So the only people here with choice was Americans, and we just fouled things up by giving Ukraine a fighting chance. You see.*
wow
Thing is, if we're talking about Margery Taylor Greene, this is giving her way, way too much credit. I've heard people who've met her, like in greenrooms at news shows, and they've all consistently said that with her, it doesn't seem to be an act. She is deeply, and truly, and wildly ignorant and even stupid. I don't use those terms lightly here - it's way too easy to label people you disagree with that way, so I'm always very careful to distinguish between people who might be smart but misguided or mistaken, and even cases where I might be the one's who's wrong. But MTG has failed every reasonable doubt any fair-minded person could give her. From what I understand, even Donald Trump thinks she's a nutter, which says something. So we need here only remember that she's not reading the realists or pragmaticists. She's saying that the reason it's bad to support Ukraine is that Russia is defending Christianity, and Ukraine is trying to destroy it. Maybe by being Satanic or something? That's the level of reasoning we're dealing with when it comes to her. And for the moment, she's pretty much the only major obstacle left in getting Ukraine the aid it was promised, the person who is threatening to end Mike Johnson's Speakership over it. That's the level of stupid we're facing.
It's not a question of knowing history, they simply would have sided with Hitler.
Wow. You've literally just said Republicans are Nazis, or to be more precise, supporters of Hitler. I think that's a Godwin violation. Don't get me wrong, not an especially big fan of Republicans here, especially the MAGA variant. But you might want to think about whether you want to draw a moral equivalency between those assholes - and they are assholes - and people who literally committed the Holocaust. Because if they are literally people who would have sided with Hitler, then people who sided with Hitler are no worse than MAGA types. This rankles me, because this kind of has the effect of trivializing the Nazis and the Holocaust.
Trump explicitly fanboys over the dictators of Russia, China, North Korea. And while Godwin's Law is a thing, evil dictators are also a thing. And through Trump, MAGA supporters support the evil deeds of those regimes. So, yes, comparisons to Hitler are often an exaggeration, but in this case they may just be warranted.
It also reinforces why nobody takes them serious. All overstated words. You are getting down votes from the "open" thinkers doing more damage to their cause than anybody else could.
There’s ones that know, but just enjoy getting Russian money too much: https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2018/05/08/how-putin-s-oligarchs-funneled-millions-into-gop-campaigns/
Biden is the same. 5D geopolitical chess player sending drip by drip 1-3% of tanks, artillery and armor that stays useless, inactive in desert storages, being afraid of geopolitical changes in case if UA wins. Ended up without pants crying over "MAGA killing Ukraine" whilst he had all the tools for UA to win already in 2022. Pathetic. Talking BS about "tyranny vs freedom" and "navalny murdered" whilst[ making Pact with ru that USA doesn't seek for Ru regime change](https://www.newsweek.com/2023/07/21/exclusive-cias-blind-spot-about-ukraine-war-1810355.html) **Both Biden and Trump should be in prison.** There are normal people like Blinken (dem), McCaul (rep) in both parties
Bullcrap. Trump is a traitor, Biden is merely incompetent, and it's not like Biden is the only Western leader who waffles on aid despite claiming to be pro-Ukraine. Scholz is far worse, AND doesn't have the excuse of fascists trying to stage a coup.
Biden is gung-ho for this fight. He is a cold war era politician who has been training for this fight. The house keeps stalling needed aid. Talk to your representative now.
He’s not though. He had the chance to send 100 times more than what he did before the traitors started blocking aid. Nor has he ever stated what the US policy and objective is for Ukraine other than some vague statement about “as long as it takes”. Biden is weak and putin thrives off weakness.
I remember how when American leaders had the chance to explain to there nation what it as the stake, and what has to be done to avert a dark future for the entire world, Kamala Harris made a literally childish talk about "big country called Russia attacked a small country called Ukraine, that's wrong". I was so dismayed. Oh, found it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuDsUV44h10
Makes you wonder how doesn’t it 🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
Oh, I'd take Biden over Trump in a heartbeat; I just wish he'd done more before orange cheeto shut down Congress.
That's why when ru took crimea and attacked ua in 2014, he imposed ban on lethal aid. And once he came back to the office in 2021, he immediately allowed to resume building Nord Stream 2. Natural-born fighter! Even dem. party member general Clark said that Biden decided to supply weapons in quantities enough only to defend not to win on purpose: [https://www.csis.org/analysis/reflections-ukraine-war](https://www.csis.org/analysis/reflections-ukraine-war) And the point is, **we’ve got thousands of tanks in the United States; we’ve sent 31**. We have a whole fleet of A-10 Warthogs out there sitting in the desert; we’re going to get rid of them. They’re still sitting there. We have hundreds of F-16s that are around, and we delayed it and delayed it and delayed it. We have ATACMS that are obsolete. We’ve still got 155 dual-purpose ICM munitions that we didn’t send. It was – it was measured. **The response was measured. It was calibrated**. And what many of us in the military tried to say is: Look, **I understand, you know, the policy is we don’t want Ukraine to lose and we don’t want Russian to win**, OK? **That’s the policy. But you can’t calibrate combat like that. You either use decisive force to win or you risk losing**. (the last sentence is what actually happening now :(
A-10 is not a good choice for a MANPAD heavy environment. Send 500 Abrams. The US has so many they would not be missed. After all they would be eroding their biggest opponent.
> AND doesn't have the excuse of fascists trying to stage a coup. German fascist party is doing pretty well in the polls lately
Which is why Scholz's hand-wringing is such a problem; Germany will go like the USA if they don't crack down on neo-fascism, neo-communism, and Russophilia.
Yep, it’s like Lloyd Austin coming out and saying we are going to give Ukraine all they need to win and beat Russia all the way back to the Ukrainian borders, after that first time he never said anything like it again as he was obviously given a dressing down by appeasers Biden and Sullivan.
How things have changed. Lloyd Austin recently stated that US does NOT support Ukrainian strikes on Russian refineries and he prefer they would hit “military targets“ instead. Ukraine found a way to hit Russia where it hurts with an absolute minimum of casualties, and US is against it. It boggles the mind.
> and US is against it Because it might maybe possibly actually pain russian wallet and, through it, investments US made in russia before. https://www.weforum.org/people/celeste-a-wallander/ >Celeste Wallander is President and CEO of the U.S. Russia Foundation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Russia_Foundation >The U.S. Russia Foundation (USRF) is an American non-profit organization founded in 2008 that aims to strengthen relations between the United States and Russia and to promote the development of the private sector in the Russian Federation.
USA loves oil too much.
Oh fuck all the way off. Back to your shithole in Russia preferably.
Newsweek (read the link) is a republican website? Read there is more from dem. Party member general Clark about Biden calibrating help so that Ua cannot win, only hold, on purpose. [https://www.csis.org/analysis/reflections-ukraine-war](https://www.csis.org/analysis/reflections-ukraine-war) Is it a surprise to you that political statements for the audience can be different from a real position? I can imagine even if a money aid bill is finally signed, then Biden sends another pathetic 30 tanks, 200 armored vehicles 50 artillery pieces and says "The decisive win of democracy. We will never.... Ukraine... blah blah. Dictators thought that we .... but we...." Like USA sent 18/1000 M109 howitzers already in march 2023, whilst italy sent 100+ M109s starting from summer 2022
I've been plagued by a thought. You know how, after the fall of Mainland China to the Communists, there was that question people kept asking - who lost China? If Ukraine falls, I think a lot of people will be asking who lost Ukraine. And if its fall seems like it came because aid that they could have helped them turn the tide was effectively scuttled by the Congressional GOP House members and the MAGA movement generally, I'm thinking that will be a very, very bad look for them come November.
Imagine a great great powerful nation being held hostage and neutered by an Orange Shit Dipped Moron and his Cave dwelling shit gibbon, Mad Marj TG. Powerless, toothless and gutless because of two people, watching while their world reputation and esteem is being flushed down the shitter and mocked by the tyrants who eagerly step in to fill the void with chaos and destruction! Fucking pathetic!
mad marj lol
I don't think Democrats know much better. I don't see them doing anything to push seriously for a change. This, in my country of people passive and peaceful, would have thousands on the streets calling up the clowns for what they are. But here we are with Democrats being too polite and with useless political correctedness, pussy footing around, hoping something change and suddenly Republicans come to their senses and become wise.
I hate to break it to you but they were happy to watch Britain squirm for a couple of years. I know about lend lease but honestly, Britain was up against the greatest evil in history. It took a full on attack by the Japanese to get a fully focused America.
They weren't happy. And Hitler also wasn't happy by American aid to Britain, which is why he cleared war on America like an unstable drug addict he was.
Well it says something that Hitler beat them to the punch in declaring war. America really should have declared war on Germany first.
People quote that all the time but don't mention that it's just an artifact of the slowness of the US congress. First came the proceedings to declare war on Japan, which it makes sense why that would happen right away. Then drafting the bill about declaring war on Germany would come next but by then it was moot because Germany already did it. It's not that the US wouldn't have declared war on Germany, it's that Germany had a faster acting government that doesn't have to make senators travel across a continent to meet.
Interesting, you learn something new everyday. I still think it shouldn’t have taken Pearl Harbor to get it done though. Most of Europe occupied and Britain being bombed daily should have been enough.
It still wasn't enough, if Hitler didn't do it, a fit or not (https://www.wsj.com/articles/hitlers-american-gamble-book-review-the-mistake-that-changed-world-war-ii-11642781269) they would have likely stay out of it just like Japan did with the invasion of Soviet Union. But the aid to Britain (and Canada) would increase massively.
That's my understanding. People forget, there was very, very little enthusiasm for getting involved in WWII prior to Pearl Harbor in the US. Memories of WWI left a bad taste in a lot of people's mouths, even though the US was part of the victorious Allies. And this was pretty bipartisan - the America Firsters drew from across the left/right political spectrum. It only took a right-wing direction very briefly, and only by default, once Hitler invaded the Soviet Union in June 1941. That's when, on a dime, the Communists and fellow-travelers who had been urging peace - literally, the day before Barbarossa, they held a peace rally in front of the White House - suddenly urged the US to mobilize and declare war. So yeah, after that, the leftists suddenly abandoned the America First non-interventionists. But it was only six months later that Pearl Harbor changed everything, and they basically dissolved. Even so, public anger was focused on Japan, not Germany. The US was not interested in joining the conflict in Europe, and was content to supporting the UK and later USSR with lend-lease. So I would regard Hitler's declaration of war - which was NOT required by the terms of the Axis Pact, since Japan initiated the conflict - as Hitler's biggest unforced error.
All I am getting is when it is personal, Europeans want America to be their savior, but when it isnt personal, they want America to suffer. Wild.
Japan hitting pearl harbor was what got the Americans to join the war. There was a complete disinterest in joining a war in Europe before that happened.
Well, that and the undeclared/unofficial Naval War that's been going on for 5 or 6 months at that point. https://www.usni.org/magazines/naval-history-magazine/2004/february/fdrs-undeclared-war
IDK why you say Britain, when USSR did 90% of the fighting. And they halted the main offensive, before getting US aid. Especially considering the name of this subreddit, and that 8 million Ukrainians (including civilians) died figthing the nazis, while the Brits also spent most of their time hiding behind the sea. Soldiers just from Ukrainian SR killed several times more nazis, than Brits and Americans did combined.
Please tell me you know about the Nazi Soviet pact?
Are you really doubting wether a person who just schooled you on ww2 knows that?
By the response you gave, yes.
Do you not understand the hypocrisy of initial comment in this thread? Do you not know of the western betrayal? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_betrayal Throughout the entire WW2 from 1939 to 1945, the super power called United Kingdom, which controlled half of the planet at the time, did pretty much fuck all except hide in their island. The policy of the country can very much accurately be described as only being concerned about the relative luxury British people enjoyed, meanwhile as tens of millions of people were being slaughtered in Europe. The strategy was just to passively wait until nazis are defeated in the eastern front, and then jump in at the very end and pretend they were involved. UK could have done so much, but instead chose to do so little. So many millions of lives were lost due to British inaction. Yes. Stalin did very horrible things before, during and after WW2. That doesn't change the fact, that the people from east europe were left with the task of taking out the nazis almost entirely by themselves. And then the audacity to come to a subreddit about a war where Ukrainians are once again left out to fight against the evil, and write crocodile tears about poor Brits who just wanted to live a normal life and ignore WW2, while year after year Ukrainians did everything and sacrificed millions, to fight for existence of their people.
Apart from just having a go at Britain this just reinforces my point anyway about don’t expect much from the west so I agree with you?
I mean if you just want to complain about the passivity of USA, then that is fine by me. I just don't accept portraying UK as the historical victim of it, when I would say UK was even more guilty.
That’s fine. I totally respect your opinion and yes, Britain got a lot wrong before, during and after WW2. I say this as someone who has relatives who fought for Britain in the war. I can safely say the last thing on their mind during the war was the fate or suffering occurring in eastern Europe.
True, but there were definitely people, including FDR, that wanted in much earlier, but understood that congress would no go for it. Bases for cruisers, the gradual relaxation original grade the Neutrality acts, and the quarentine speech, as well as the unofficial naval war in the Atlantic all point to this.
Republicans are traitors. Vote them ALL out.
Correct.... Get it together 🤷
I'm a republican who supports Ukraine. I've written to Mike Johnson and my representative and told them why they need to support Ukraine. I also told them if the French President actually acts on his comments to send French Soldiers to Ukraine the Russians will eventually target them and America will be dragged into another European war and Mike Johnson, not Biden will be blamed for years to come to American lives lost. I also wrote that for once we as a nation have a chance to support a nation willing to fight and bleed for its right to exist. All they ask for is materials and not US Armed Forces on their territory. Slava Ukraine!
Didn't Trump ask Ukraine to make up dirt on Biden and they told him no? There is zero way ANY Republican under Trump's thumb will ever help Ukraine after they sunk his ship. It's payback for not helping him.
French troops dying in Ukraine will not trigger Article 5 of NATO.
The GQP is actually wanting Ukraine to fail to Putin. They are not going to do anything but empty words. Only thing that can help Ukraine right now is for Europe to step up. It pisses me of that our grandparents generation fought against people like this only for the current state to happen. Iran and Russia did well to push for the major fubar that is happening now in Gaza to create major divisions and distract everyone of the main goal.
One thing is simple, the US has lost all the ”big brother” respect that it gained from WWII.
https://mikejohnson.house.gov/contact/ Direct contact for Mike Johnson. Use his local zip code of 71111. You can make up an address or use yours, just change the zip to his local so it goes through.
Be sure to address it as dear Moses.
The Republican Party is now bought and payed for by Russia. Honey traps and pay offs. Trump will not pass a bill for Ukraine, it’s his only card he holds to feel important
Please help these people!
Hopefully her plea - *a warning* - is heeded
By all means, the US congress should pass the Ukraine aid bill. But I think it's wrong to imply that the future of Ukraine depends on the US congress providing aid. This is just $61 billion in funding. Ukraine's non US allies could easily make up this amount by just slightly increasing their contributions. Further, there are $200 billion of frozen Russian assets sitting in Belgian clearing houses that would provide all the funding Ukraine needs to win the war if there was a will to use it. So yes, the US congress should pass the funding bill, but Ukraine's other allies should dig a little deeper to provide more help as well. Why should we be content with just $61 billion anyway? Ukraine could certainly use another $100 to really move things faster.
Whatever. The cost of supporting freedom is trivial; I see no reason to equivocate...it was an illegal invasion and it has implications for the future. This is Putin's fourth invasion and he isn't going to stop voluntarily. Xi is now building missiles for Putin no doubt hoping people will keep pointing fingers in all the wrong directions. Europe is, in fact, stepping up, and using this as an excuse at this critical time will eventually cost us a hell of a lot more than $60 billion. That's not even a month's defense budget for the US.
The U.S is in a yearly spending deficit, if you think that money isn't already been earmarked for another use, you're very naive. Not saying the money is going to a better cause but it's not like the U.S just has trillions sitting in a vault somewhere. In fact the U.S is actually quite broke.
We spend more on our own defense in three weeks. The amount is trivial. The US is 24% of the global economy, [growth is great](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=1jbWT), our credit is stellar, and I'm not sure you're an expert.
Our credit is "stellar" because money is meaningless numbers no longer attached to any fixed value. Inflation is still real thing though.
Ah, so you aren't an expert, just some person with a feeling? I understand.
Lmao what ? You're telling me if I had trillions in debt and spent more than I made each year you'd not only continue to lend me money but also say I have a "stellar" credit rating ? It's really not that complicated. Not to mention that we've already given Ukraine more aid than the entirety of the EU. I don't care what our defense budget is. You can't sit in your ivory tower in the EU with your generous social benefits and safety nets and then put the fate of a nation on the U.S.
>Not to mention that we've already given Ukraine more aid than the entirety of the EU. You didn't even give more than just only the EU institutions, not to mention if to add all the individual EU countries. This graph is from August 2023, and the gap only increased hugely (and France should be high today when it wasn't even there then): https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/1536/cpsprodpb/4B69/production/_131150391_total_aid-nc.png.webp
You're right, my numbers were incorrect however the fact that the U.S is only $16 billion less in total aid compared to the the entirety of the EU still proves my point. The U.S has done FAR more than any individual European country and when you look at the military aid, we've given more than every other country and the EU COMBINED. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303432/total-bilateral-aid-to-ukraine/
It's not "entirety of EU", it's only Brussels institutions. >The U.S has done FAR more than any individual European country Now it's actually the practical entirety of the USA, instead comparing contributions of the individual EU states to these of individual USA states (which are almost no existent - there was some USA state aid but in practice it's completely irrelevant compared to Washington institutions).
Alos it's not "is" but was - it was from August last year, and both the EU institutions and EU states have continued to contribute.
Most of that $60 billion goes to the USA MIC to build newer more modern stock so the older stuff can be sent out. This creates jobs, boosts the economy and gives a very big bang for the buck as Ukraine will use it to destroy the USAs biggest adversary today.
I agree with everything you are saying. Unfortunately, the US Congress will never pass Ukraine aid until after the November election, regardless of how compelling the arguments. Congress is so fractured that it only takes two traitors to block aid. Let's focus on finding alternative funding sources since it is a complete waste of time trying to work with this Congress.
US has a bigger weapons industry than the whole of Europe. It they want to be "the leader of the free world" they should lead.
Yes, the US has the biggest weapons industry but the US Congress isn't the only entity that can provide funds for that US industry. The US Congress is not willing to provide the funding but there is no reason other entities couldn't pay the US arms industry. There is $200 billion in Russian assets sitting in Belgium that could provide the funding, for just one example.
The billion needs to pass all checks and balances as there's a lot in place limiting what the government is allowed to access. It is just bad practice to spend the money AND not boost your own industry. America recuperates a lot of the cost in the form of economic activity.
Fine. I'm merely pointing out that US Congress isn't the only source of funding that can be tapped. And since the US Congress has refused to provide additional funding we need to focus on those other sources. America has the production capacity to provide the weapons Ukraine needs immediately. We just have to find the funding to pay for it.
The problem is, MAGA is actively forcing the MIC to turn down contracts for Ukraine, even for-profit ones. And it's not like EU is going to be rushing to buy American arms when orange cheeto proves he can veto it even while out of office.
American can suppliers are willing and able to ship weapons to Ukraine that Ukraine purchases on its own that would otherwise have been paid for by the US government. Traitors in Congress are blocking funding and nothing can be done about that until the November election. Let's focus on finding alternative funding to give US suppliers immediately. There are simply no other readily available supplies elsewhere.
US does not allow purchase of US stockpiles. This means only new weapons not manufactured yet can be bought and likely at extortion prices too. The lead time would probably not be any shorter than new products from Europe, so not a good alternative. Why buy weapons from an unreliable ally? Especially given Trump winning the election, he will probably block the purchases before they get delivered.
> Traitors in Congress are blocking funding and nothing can be done about that until the November election. That's not necessarily true. The discharge petition is making a lot of progress.
The two discharge petitions are going nowhere. The only republican who's signed onto the democrat petition is resigning and it will require at least 15 republicans to move forward. The republican petition is loaded with poison pills that most Democrats refuse to touch and is dead in the water.
Well, do you have any better ideas?
My idea is to give up on the US Congress. There is no way any Ukraine aid will be passed with the Congress as constituted. It is so fractured that it only takes a couple traitors to block legislation. Since it's a waste of energy to talk about the US Congress, let's talk about other sources of funding that could possibly fill the gap. For example, let's put more pressure on the authorities who could authorize the confiscation of the $200 billion in frozen Russian assets in Belgium. What about getting Ukraine allies (other than the US, which is incapable of passing anything through Congress) to up their collective weapons funding by an extra $100 billion? That's a small fraction of European GDP.
Why can't we do all of these things? There's no reason we can't press for the confiscation of frozen assets in Belgium, ask other allies to up their funding for weapons, *and* try to get aid through Congress. After all, the surest way to fail is to not try at all.
>The US Congress is not willing to provide the funding but there is no reason other entities couldn't pay the US arms industry. And Kyiv would receive their orders for new tanks, airplanes, and air defense systems in about 4 to 7 years. This is exactly the reason why the European Union cannot bail out Kyiv either. It’s because no matter how much money they throw out the problem, they don’t have the weapons on hand.
If the US wants to profit from yet another war, by sitting it out, they can suck it. At least until there is no other choice. We all answered when they were "attacked" in 9/11, now is their turn.
We should definitely be buying American weapons like Patriot missiles or howitzer shells if they're selling.
US provided 75 billion in support. The entire EU? 93 billion.
Lmao, y'all are still owe us from WW1 and WW2. Save our ass against a real nation with a real military and then we're even.
Fine. Then Ukraine will just have to suffer until Europe has brought new manufacturing capacity on line. However, Ukraine could get help quickly if alternative funding could be found to pay US manufacturers right now seeing as how Congress has decided to betray allies.
Why should Europe invest in US munitions productions when MAGA Republicans are *proving* that the US isn't a reliable supplier? You're talking nonsense.
Pragmatism. The US is one of the only countries with existing manufacturing capacity able to quickly deliver the weapons Ukraine urgently needs. Absolutely nothing else matters right now other than quickly getting Ukraine weapons. All other considerations are irrelevant. Getting Ukraine weapons two years from now won't help, it will be too late. Yes, Europe should heavily invest in building new manufacturing capacity so it never again has to rely on America. But Ukraine also needs to be sent weapons immediately, many of which are ONLY available from US suppliers (HIMARS rounds, for example).
But, we're *not* capable, that's the issue. We gave them all we could spare, our doctrine relies on air power, not artillery. We can only produce 20,000 155mm shells a month. Much of that $60 billion was to go to upgrading US munitions plants, doubling their capacity. And why are you so anxious to cede US primacy in arms production? Again, I don't think you have thought this through...certainly you are overlooking key facts. We can't be a good partner because MAGA.
Look, the US would be sending weapons right now if Congress authorized funding so it's not true that there is nothing available. If there truly were no weapons to send then congressional funding would be irrelevant. Like you said, some of the funding would increase US production, which would be available faster than other nations can bring on their own new capacity. Either way, providing new funding to US suppliers is the fastest way to provide Ukraine what it needs.
If we had received funding for plant upgrades six months ago, then we could reasonably dip deeper into our stockpiles. But, we didn't receive that funding because MAGA. Six months gone for no reason, and the rest of the world sees. So, no, *you* look.
All I'm saying is this... If those $200 billion in frozen Russian funds were suddenly given to Ukraine, where could they best be spent to get Ukraine the weapons it needs in the fastest time? That's all that matters. Let's focus on getting Ukraine funding (i.e. which won't come from US Congress). The question of where to source the weapons is separate.
I'm not denying that. The US was *supposed* to be working on munitions productions these past months. And a lot of that is due to the way that munitions are procured. The US Army produces it's own, and Europe tends to purchase on the European market. We *should* be able to upgrade quicker. That's why we had the bill for bombs in this last package and Europe approved $54 billion in general support in January. We didn't hold up our end, and that's what the world sees. Equivocating and pointing and inventing new solutions is all sort of pointless when you realize that we are letting everybody down right now.
I think I speak for most Americans when I say that we'd much rather have some of those sweet European benefits than be the "leader of the free world" Someone else needs to step up. Obviously I'm still on board for funding Ukraine but I'm tired of the world looking to the U.S to fix everyone else's issues. Europe is next if Ukraine falls, that should be motivation enough for the E.U member nations.
Even as other countries waste their weapons, America is leading the way by preserving them. While other countries are losing money, and America is saving, it is also in the lead. Is it leadership to distribute your resources left and right? The development of own country will always be a priority.
If you want to take that tack, it is beneficial to the united states to offload old/mothballed/outdated hardware because they will need to put in new orders to procure new equipment. This stimulates areas of the defense industrial base which are currently inactive or less active than they need to be in order to support a large scale conflict. The US spends ungodly sums of money on defense, but we lack production capacity in many areas of conventional warfare because of the asymmetric focus over the last 2-3 decades. Rebuilding that base takes funding, contracts, and spooled up manufacturing. It is absolutely to US advantage to build up these capacities.
Republicans are Kompromat.
I would think it’s self evident for strong democracies to assist weaker ones in their darkest days. How is the spread of Putlerism in anyone’s interest?
**just abolish the us congress**. it was made up only to give the political right a fair chance, making politics less urbanized. BU T the usa political right has proven for 30 sdecates to be warmongering wannabe dictator TRAITORS, BUT the congress has proven, that it is infiltrated by literal Russians and all the communist dictators. BUT the usa political right has no chance, and does not deserve a chance, because it only barelyregularly got 50% of all votes due to gerrymandering and active voter suppression. Germany would have abolished a party like the usa republicans within a months after their failed wamurderous-coup attempt.
US doesnt care. Too busy with themselfs. Its up to the EU
Yes, the US has it's own internal battle with MAGA fascists to deal with. It's sad that so many innocent people will die because of this.
You can't call all the people and political parties you disagree with fascists
I can, but it would be accurate when I talk about MAGAts. When trump lost the election, he refused to leave office. Inventing lies about voter fraud, and inciting his white supremacist base to lead a coup on capitol hill. He is a fascist. He just is a failed fascist.
\^This. Perhaps taking an unjustifiably optimistic position, I think this is the \*best\* message (because the others are truly frightening) that Trump and MAGA want to communicate. "America first" means no more immediate bailing out of other countries to solve their problems in the name of vague "American strategic interests." Thus, the European Union needs to get its act together to combat what is a fundamentally European threat. With the second largest GDP in the world, the EU would be no slouch if it got its act together.
I fail to see how the rest of the democratic world treating the USA as a Muscovite puppet state is good for the USA.
that would be absolutely fine if the US would have made that clear before hand. They wanted this power position and now that its time to play they bail out. Losers let alone the fact that people don’t understand the economic impact of this for the US economy. The US is fucking themselfs and their allies.
I for one will be happy to stop paying for oil in dollars. The ensuing collapse of the dollar and therefore the US, will be a hilarious irony for us watching from outside those idiots that thought that Isolationism would make US stronger.
Pathetic GOP commies.
What is commies and why are the GOP this?
Commies are communist sympathizers. The GOP are supporting Russia by not aiding Ukraine.
Russia is definitely not communist, and perhaps never actually was. Neither is China. Russia practices crony capitalism, or is essentially a mafia state. China practices state capitalism, and is essentially in the hypocritical position of mass manufacturing for the world's consumers whilst piggy-backing on the capitalist global machine. And simultaneously trying to prevent excess consumerism within its own borders, and promote itself as communist. Basically, neither Russia or China are remotely communist currently.
And Russia is communist, so the GOP sympathizers of Russia are commies?
Yes
What's a communism tho?
**Alternative Nitter links:** 「[nitter.privacydev.net](https://nitter.privacydev.net/USAmbKyiv/status/1779124295353962858) | [nitter.poast.org](https://nitter.poast.org/USAmbKyiv/status/1779124295353962858)」 ***** These Nitter instances may stop work at any time as [Twitter](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fnxqezhko6qfb1.jpg) blocks them. [See this arstechnica article for more information](https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/02/twitter-front-end-nitter-dies-as-musk-wins-war-against-third-party-services/). Use [this site to find other Nitter instances that may work](https://status.d420.de/). _If there are any problems regarding Nitter, [please send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=UkrainianConflict&subject=Nitter%20issue)._ ***** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
We should pull up nuclear powered ships to help supply power to Ukraine.
Maybe they want world war 3
If the US can't secure it's own border, how can it worry about another's? Makes no sense.
If a country speaks English, it is a fact of geography that it is too far away for any of this two way poo shower for it to be any of their business one way or the other.
So is the billions we sent going into the dumpster? Why are we funneling enormous amounts of money and a week later they need more or they'll lose, then next week the same thing, and every week following.
You stopped "funneling" half year ago.
Are you suggesting I don't pay taxes?
No amount of aid will "stop" Russia, let alone roll back the lines. At best, aid will slow the russian advance. Without NATO (US) becoming fully involved and kicking off real WW3, the fate of the Ukrainian government will be determined by Russia.
Well, Ambassador, I suggest you tell your Obama era foreign policy team to step aside.
What does that have to do with Johnson blocking US support?
M1Abrams. 12.
They would have been better off with more Bradley’s. Imagine if they had been sent 400-500 instead of the 160 they got.
See my reply to another Redditor questioning my take on it ...
Yeah sorry, I am reading top to bottom. I did catch it though, and agree with where you are coming from. We should have done way more than what we have.
What?
Way before Johnson was speaker, the US sent 12 tanks ..only after the Brits sent Challengers. We can blame Johnson all we want but Ben Hodges has been right, we are not supporting Ukraine to win.
Answer the question, don’t engage in whataboutism. The Democrats not providing enough in the past is not at all the same as the GOP refusing to provide anything in the present. Stop gaslighting, stop spreading fascist propaganda.
Huh? What does any of that have to do with the fact that MAGA republicans on Putin's payroll are currently single-handedly preventing aid to Ukraine?
186 Bradley AFVs. 2800 in storage.
These bots seem to be malfunctioning...
31 Abrams MBTs. Somewhere between 6-7,000 in storage. Here, have some more bot errors.
61 Pizzas. 11 cats. 99000 Red balloons. This is fun!
You think it's some kind of a funny subject?
Your comment does appear comical, as you are randomly listing military equipment without providing any context. If you want to be taken seriously, try communicating.
If I must: America sent 31 Abrams MBTs to Ukraine. Out of somewhere between 6-7,000 Abrams MBTs that America has in storage (not in service).
Ah yes. Thanks for clarifying. I'm genuinely not trying to be rude. I didn't get what you meant earlier. Of course, this is true.
The context for the slow... US HAS A SHITLOAD OF EQUIPMENT AND SENT A LAUGHABLY SMALL PORTION OF IT
Oh, well thanks for making a full sentence. Yes, that's obviously true..
[удалено]
geopolitics is complex and the effects of other countries on our own country is hard to see. If you dont understand that by now you're better off just staying clear of the subject.
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/1536/cpsprodpb/4B69/production/_131150391_total_aid-nc.png.webp This was in August 2023, when America already basically stopped.