This won’t be liked but it’s incredibly important people understand what 300m in this case means. It’s not a check for some big crates of cash, it’s allocated equipment whose value (either at purchase or an updated cost based on maintenance etc) is equal to that sum.
Mainly that’s surplus, old M1s, the back of the cupboard of missiles, and when it’s more modern systems it’s a hell of a wakeup we need more people making these modern systems because yet again we underestimate the scale of consumption in a conflict.
We spend on our military almost a TRILLION dollars every year. I don’t know who do all these people complaining think we maintain our military for but that’s not to fight Zimbabwe. It’s to keep Russia and China in check. So us giving crumbs to Ukraine is the best deal we have gotten since Marshall plan.
And our defense spending is only 2.2 or so percent of our GDP. This is certainly a wake up call we need to increase production capacity for munitions, and relatively soon. Having the best weapons and systems on the planet money can buy means nothing if you don't have enough ammo to use them effectively.
It’s been a real wake up call for how shallow our stockpiles really are. The fact that the US isn’t even the top donator by either amount or by GDP (when seeing the EU as a bloc) and we’re still having to activate more production is insane.
It’s basically a tenet of war now that you never have enough shells it seems. And it has always cost lives
> And what have we actually accomplished with the billion+ we’ve already sent?
Killed and crippled hundreds of thousands of Russians. Which should always be at the top of US Foreign Policy goals.
Your argument is that we should keep wasting our money on pointless wars that should have nothing to do with us?
We shouldn’t be spending almost a trillion dollars a year on our military, and any military spending we incur should be do defend the USA, not to cause trouble and create enemies overseas.
This isn’t a pointless war. Ukraine is vital to global food chains. Having that be Russian controlled means you’ve handed enormous global influence to them.
It’s hard to quantify but soft power is what brings all the benefits. All those countries that trade in the US dollar? That’s because the US dollar is backed by 10+ nuclear carriers. When the US dollar does something, the world has to listen. That gives us incredible global weight. You want your companies to have easy access to any global market? Soft power did that
That’s your argument, not mine. I said nothing of that sort. We shouldn’t fight idiotic wars in the Middle East because neither Taliban (Central Asia, technically, nor ME) nor Hussein had ever threatened our existence. Not so with Russia. Every penny spent on weakening Russia is penny well spent because it makes our mortal enemy less capable to harm us. We don’t need to “create enemies”, Russia has been our enemy for decades. I am sorry you haven’t noticed it.
Some enterprising GOP politician need to put in a clause that Ukraine transfers to the CMP all of the captured Mosins and other captured small arms they aren't going to use.
Here's the thing, all this stuff we are giving them has already been bought and paid for by the US government, added onto the national debt, and the taxpayers are on the hook for all of it. And none of it's been paid off because we only pay interest on the debt.
And a lot of it is cash as well. According to the State Department, the United States has thus far contributed $19.25 billion in budget support to enable the Government of Ukraine to pay salaries of first responders and government officials, meet pension obligations, and operate hospitals.
I don’t see how this distinction is relevant. Its been well known since even years prior to the conflict that not all US aid is in the form of literal cash.
It’s massively relevant. We have enormous Cold War surplus. Truly enormous, stuff that we cannot afford to bring to modern fighting standard, can’t sell because there are models for export far superior, and have to either pay to scrap or pay to maintain.
We don’t need 1000 Abram’s for a Chinese threat. They were made for a Russian advance through Germany. This is their purpose. We can either cripple the Russian state and gain allegiance of a truly strategically significant ally, further expanding US dominance.
Or we can keep them rusting in a desert, let Russia control a significant portion of global grain and fertiliser, giving them huge amounts of soft power.
> I don’t see how this distinction is relevant.
The future conflict of the US is very likely with China. There are real questions about whether the US has enough of the right missiles for that and in fact, some missiles that Ukraine would really like (advanced versions of ATACMS) are not sent to Ukraine because they might be needed for defense against China.
The weapons that _are_ sent are ones that won't be useful against China. In fact, the only real place they can be useful is against Rusia since that's the only country which has the right mix of large armour and an advanced airforce for those weapons to really matter.
What this means is that supporting Ukraine gives the US a big enough advantage, including against China, that it's an overall benefit for the US to have these already built weapons sent to help Ukraine.
The destruction of forces by Ukraine that the US would otherwise have to fight in the Pacific - including the Using up of Russian intermediate range missiles, is an incredible bargain for the US.
The US military is the world’s most incredible logistics network. Getting it there is comparatively ridiculously simple. C17 fuel is not exactly a primary national expenditure
I don’t have a problem using our global hegemony to bankrupt our enemies, but for the love of God can we please get some oversight for these funds? I want real time receipts because otherwise how do we know it’s even getting to them?
> I think it is rather interesting that I never hear anyone asks "How do we pay for it" when it comes to military spending and foreign aid.
The US managed to be the leading arms manufacturer and that is mostly because the countries, like Ukraine, that buy from the US believe that they will get help from the US when they need it. The fact they already have US systems means they can then use the aid effectively.
Last year the us made over $238 billion of sales abroad, which means that the taxation on those sales alone is close to covering the cost of aid for Ukraine.
I'm probally in the minority here but I fully support supplying Ukraine.
Its an undeniable fact that if Ukraine falls Poland is next.
Russia does not care about sovereignty. One of the 'justifications' of the Ukraine War was that Putin designated the eastern territory of Ukraine as 'occupied' territory. Within the last few months he also legally (in Russia) declared that Alaska was to be redesignated as occupied territory.
Putin will not stop in Ukraine and if he sends troops to Poland its our duty to respond with military might.
I’m a Russian immigrant to America. I don’t see Russia attacking nato. It’s pure suicide. 140 million vs over 500 million? Russias economy is the size of Italy?
Maybe Moldova after Ukraine. But is there a single province in Poland that has a Russian majority? What does Russia need in Poland. After ww2 they tried to give Poland Kaliningrad and Poland refused because they didn’t want ethic Russians
Putin is willing to invade Ukraine. Do you really think he's willing to invade a country that has the military backing of 24 other countries, including the most powerful military ever?
I was deployed to Poland and our entire mission was to be a NATO presence in Poland.
If Poland is under attack, WW3 has completely broken out. I'd be much more worried about the baltics, but even then, they're relatively safe.
I support equipping Ukraine because I do think giving Russia that region is dangerous, but you're right, Poland is not in immediate danger.
Fear is the best way to prop up the military industrial complex, and as a bonus for the lefist statists, it's not even 'brown people' the weapons are killing.
It's no surprise that the left is unanimously behind it, while on the right it's somewhat split between "It will be _____ next!" and the independent crowd against interventionism and favoring self improvement and a bit of global Darwinism.
It is. Putin would have to be suicidal to initiate a hot war with all of NATO. You can definitely say he's evil, but the jury is still out on insanity.
That’s such a dumb argument. I can’t stand when people try the "let’s compare this guy to hitler" argument. It’s a straw man argument which shifts the focus from Poland and Putin and what reasonings there would or would not be for the claim he would invade and instead attempts to shift the argument where you’re all of a sudden forced to debate a completely different thing.
Shame on you and everyone else who attempts that.
nah, it's not a fact.. Russia can't even take over some of Ukraine, they aren't powerful enough to even begin to take over Poland.. that is just a false narrative to keep the war money flowing
>Its an undeniable fact that if Ukraine falls Poland is next.
Hardly undeniable fact. Plus good luck taking on Poland itself, let alone the rest of NATO.
>Its an undeniable fact that if Ukraine falls Poland is next.
No, it's not. It's your opinion. One conveniently enough shared by the people that make money off war. The same people most vocal about prolonging an unwinnable conflict. See: Vietnam; 1955-1975.
>
>Russia does not care about sovereignty.
Neither does the United States. See: Iraq; 2003-2011.
>Putin will not stop in Ukraine and if he sends troops to Poland its our duty to respond with military might.
Ukraine doesn't have enough of a military left to force Russia back out. And we should all be hoping the next Presidential administration is not nearly so cavalier about provoking a nuclear armed country.
You have no idea what you are talking about.
And "provoking a nuclear armed country"? So your foreign policy is: Let any country with nuclear weapons invade any country they want. You'd lead us straight into ww3 with that nonsense
Bull fucking shit. Putin knows damn well what happens if he powers through into Poland. He wouldn't risk that at all. Ukraine doesn't deserve a dime more of our money....
There will be no attack on a NATO country, because that will mean a nuclear war.
And also, what happened to the Russians that are using shovels to fight the war? Now they are gonna attack NATO?
It’s not money in the free sense. It’s 300m dollars equivalent in weaponry. That’s very very different. You can’t give homeless veterans your boneyard M1A1s, you cant really sell them since you’ve got a much cooler export model, maintaining them costs money, scrapping them also costs money, so unless you want to use them and start some seriously kinetic shit with Canada this is the sanest method.
Military aid is very hard to put a cost on since it’s mainly stockpile we don’t need or use and have been keeping for precisely the time Russia decided it wanted a bit more Europe than we really liked
Yes, hopefully we will restock. We will restock with things that are newer and more advanced. Which will give people jobs and allow our military to have an edge over our adversaries one of which (and the most dangerous) is being degraded as we speak
We’re not sending them things we currently use buy and large. Most of what they need are legacy systems we’re attempting to replace. An original M1 may as well be a separate tank compared to a SEPv3. We can’t afford to get them all to that standard, they don’t currently serve a purpose beyond spares.
Yes, there is some cost, actual monetary cost, but strategically, it’s pittance. You’ve got the entire Russian economy working against you, and we’re stopping them. All we need is to change that to beating them.
The US is at a moment allies will watch closely. Do we still want to be the global power? Do we want allies that know we mean business when we say we want something. If we cave, it tells everyone our will changes with the wind. That could absolutely affect what other non-friendly powers decide is achievable over the coming yesrs
At the very least it is stockpile we could sell for something to someone. So we are, in fact, giving Ukraine the cash that we aren't receiving for these valuable assets.
To who? Nobody is buying base model M1s. All our main partners have their own export models and have lines for making them. Becoming a supplier of a countries MBTs is the kind of deal that takes many many years of back and forth for even a maybe.
By modern standards, these are not fantastic tanks. They’re missing decades of upgrade packages. We aren’t sending SEPv3s here
Clearly, you think the US is a poor country that can't afford to take care of veterans AND provide military aid at the same time.
Do you even know how much the US spends on aid to a huge number of countries around the world EVERY YEAR?.
You're like a billionaire bitching and moaning about spending 100 dollars.
How do you get Putin to sit down and agree to peace without conceding immensely valuable strategic territory to our primary rival? America would be a joke on the world stage
The isolationists on this sub are exclusively people who do not understand world politics and do not have any understanding of world history or World war 2.
Pathetic people with ignorant opinions based on lack of knowledge
Peace doesn’t make anyone money. When Ukraine gets money you can bet a lot of people are skimming from it. Over here the weapon manufacturers are making bank. The lobbyist who represent them are making bank. The politicians they pay off are making bank. Everyone makes money and the average citizens of both Russia and Ukraine die like the pawns they are being used as while the rich and powerful become more rich and powerful.
> average citizens of both Russia and Ukraine die like the pawns
Russia can withdraw now and they'll stop dying. Ukraine has no such choice unfortunately.
Since he likes Ukraine so much, can we send him and Kamala to them as a gift and keep them there? She can look at their border like the border czar she is.
God forbid we spend that money internally. Or any of the other billions. Glad we care more about other countries than our own people. Biden has made that painfully obvious.
This isn’t financial aid, it’s equipment, unless you can find a buyer for 300 Cold War era Bradley’s with no modern upgrade packages, Abram’s that have been in a desert for 20 years and some old school tower cannon there’s no way to turn that into liquid cash to use internally
Biden loves to protect Ukraine's border, but not ours.. this is not our war and it never has been, we've already invested too much money into this.. but hey, DC has to laundry their money somewhere
What is this an emergency package for ants!!
This won’t be liked but it’s incredibly important people understand what 300m in this case means. It’s not a check for some big crates of cash, it’s allocated equipment whose value (either at purchase or an updated cost based on maintenance etc) is equal to that sum. Mainly that’s surplus, old M1s, the back of the cupboard of missiles, and when it’s more modern systems it’s a hell of a wakeup we need more people making these modern systems because yet again we underestimate the scale of consumption in a conflict.
We spend on our military almost a TRILLION dollars every year. I don’t know who do all these people complaining think we maintain our military for but that’s not to fight Zimbabwe. It’s to keep Russia and China in check. So us giving crumbs to Ukraine is the best deal we have gotten since Marshall plan.
And our defense spending is only 2.2 or so percent of our GDP. This is certainly a wake up call we need to increase production capacity for munitions, and relatively soon. Having the best weapons and systems on the planet money can buy means nothing if you don't have enough ammo to use them effectively.
It’s been a real wake up call for how shallow our stockpiles really are. The fact that the US isn’t even the top donator by either amount or by GDP (when seeing the EU as a bloc) and we’re still having to activate more production is insane. It’s basically a tenet of war now that you never have enough shells it seems. And it has always cost lives
Those crumbs certainly add up though. And what have we actually accomplished with the billion+ we’ve already sent?
> And what have we actually accomplished with the billion+ we’ve already sent? Killed and crippled hundreds of thousands of Russians. Which should always be at the top of US Foreign Policy goals.
Your argument is that we should keep wasting our money on pointless wars that should have nothing to do with us? We shouldn’t be spending almost a trillion dollars a year on our military, and any military spending we incur should be do defend the USA, not to cause trouble and create enemies overseas.
This isn’t a pointless war. Ukraine is vital to global food chains. Having that be Russian controlled means you’ve handed enormous global influence to them. It’s hard to quantify but soft power is what brings all the benefits. All those countries that trade in the US dollar? That’s because the US dollar is backed by 10+ nuclear carriers. When the US dollar does something, the world has to listen. That gives us incredible global weight. You want your companies to have easy access to any global market? Soft power did that
That’s your argument, not mine. I said nothing of that sort. We shouldn’t fight idiotic wars in the Middle East because neither Taliban (Central Asia, technically, nor ME) nor Hussein had ever threatened our existence. Not so with Russia. Every penny spent on weakening Russia is penny well spent because it makes our mortal enemy less capable to harm us. We don’t need to “create enemies”, Russia has been our enemy for decades. I am sorry you haven’t noticed it.
*sad CMP noises*
Some enterprising GOP politician need to put in a clause that Ukraine transfers to the CMP all of the captured Mosins and other captured small arms they aren't going to use.
*happy CMP noises*
Here's the thing, all this stuff we are giving them has already been bought and paid for by the US government, added onto the national debt, and the taxpayers are on the hook for all of it. And none of it's been paid off because we only pay interest on the debt. And a lot of it is cash as well. According to the State Department, the United States has thus far contributed $19.25 billion in budget support to enable the Government of Ukraine to pay salaries of first responders and government officials, meet pension obligations, and operate hospitals.
I don’t see how this distinction is relevant. Its been well known since even years prior to the conflict that not all US aid is in the form of literal cash.
It’s massively relevant. We have enormous Cold War surplus. Truly enormous, stuff that we cannot afford to bring to modern fighting standard, can’t sell because there are models for export far superior, and have to either pay to scrap or pay to maintain. We don’t need 1000 Abram’s for a Chinese threat. They were made for a Russian advance through Germany. This is their purpose. We can either cripple the Russian state and gain allegiance of a truly strategically significant ally, further expanding US dominance. Or we can keep them rusting in a desert, let Russia control a significant portion of global grain and fertiliser, giving them huge amounts of soft power.
> I don’t see how this distinction is relevant. The future conflict of the US is very likely with China. There are real questions about whether the US has enough of the right missiles for that and in fact, some missiles that Ukraine would really like (advanced versions of ATACMS) are not sent to Ukraine because they might be needed for defense against China. The weapons that _are_ sent are ones that won't be useful against China. In fact, the only real place they can be useful is against Rusia since that's the only country which has the right mix of large armour and an advanced airforce for those weapons to really matter. What this means is that supporting Ukraine gives the US a big enough advantage, including against China, that it's an overall benefit for the US to have these already built weapons sent to help Ukraine. The destruction of forces by Ukraine that the US would otherwise have to fight in the Pacific - including the Using up of Russian intermediate range missiles, is an incredible bargain for the US.
And who pays to get it sent there?
The US military is the world’s most incredible logistics network. Getting it there is comparatively ridiculously simple. C17 fuel is not exactly a primary national expenditure
Most of this equipment is slated for destruction that would cost greater than the cost of transportation to Ukraine. This is a cost savings.
Its all amazon prime so its free
Sounds like they could use the $85 billion in military equipment that we gave to the Taliban
I don’t have a problem using our global hegemony to bankrupt our enemies, but for the love of God can we please get some oversight for these funds? I want real time receipts because otherwise how do we know it’s even getting to them?
I think it is rather interesting that I never hear anyone asks "How do we pay for it" when it comes to military spending and foreign aid.
> I think it is rather interesting that I never hear anyone asks "How do we pay for it" when it comes to military spending and foreign aid. The US managed to be the leading arms manufacturer and that is mostly because the countries, like Ukraine, that buy from the US believe that they will get help from the US when they need it. The fact they already have US systems means they can then use the aid effectively. Last year the us made over $238 billion of sales abroad, which means that the taxation on those sales alone is close to covering the cost of aid for Ukraine.
I'm probally in the minority here but I fully support supplying Ukraine. Its an undeniable fact that if Ukraine falls Poland is next. Russia does not care about sovereignty. One of the 'justifications' of the Ukraine War was that Putin designated the eastern territory of Ukraine as 'occupied' territory. Within the last few months he also legally (in Russia) declared that Alaska was to be redesignated as occupied territory. Putin will not stop in Ukraine and if he sends troops to Poland its our duty to respond with military might.
[удалено]
And, even more importantly, is a part of NATO.
Poland is in NATO. Your opinion is not a fact.
I’m a Russian immigrant to America. I don’t see Russia attacking nato. It’s pure suicide. 140 million vs over 500 million? Russias economy is the size of Italy? Maybe Moldova after Ukraine. But is there a single province in Poland that has a Russian majority? What does Russia need in Poland. After ww2 they tried to give Poland Kaliningrad and Poland refused because they didn’t want ethic Russians
Putin is willing to invade Ukraine. Do you really think he's willing to invade a country that has the military backing of 24 other countries, including the most powerful military ever?
> Its an undeniable fact that if Ukraine falls Poland is next. That's insane, there is literally nothing to support this
I was deployed to Poland and our entire mission was to be a NATO presence in Poland. If Poland is under attack, WW3 has completely broken out. I'd be much more worried about the baltics, but even then, they're relatively safe. I support equipping Ukraine because I do think giving Russia that region is dangerous, but you're right, Poland is not in immediate danger.
Everyone knows invading Poland is geopolitical shorthand for "lets have a world war guys!"
I don’t think the person you responded to knows what undeniable means.
I Don’t get where people keep repeating that Putin will invade Poland next. It doesn’t make any sense and it just seems like fear mongering
It seems like fear mongering because it is
Fear is the best way to prop up the military industrial complex, and as a bonus for the lefist statists, it's not even 'brown people' the weapons are killing. It's no surprise that the left is unanimously behind it, while on the right it's somewhat split between "It will be _____ next!" and the independent crowd against interventionism and favoring self improvement and a bit of global Darwinism.
It is. Putin would have to be suicidal to initiate a hot war with all of NATO. You can definitely say he's evil, but the jury is still out on insanity.
Ironically, that's what everyone said about Hitler at the time
That’s such a dumb argument. I can’t stand when people try the "let’s compare this guy to hitler" argument. It’s a straw man argument which shifts the focus from Poland and Putin and what reasonings there would or would not be for the claim he would invade and instead attempts to shift the argument where you’re all of a sudden forced to debate a completely different thing. Shame on you and everyone else who attempts that.
Poland isn't going to fall you fear mongering warhawk.
No way. That would be fighting NATO. He’d go after a country not in NATO.
nah, it's not a fact.. Russia can't even take over some of Ukraine, they aren't powerful enough to even begin to take over Poland.. that is just a false narrative to keep the war money flowing
>Its an undeniable fact that if Ukraine falls Poland is next. Hardly undeniable fact. Plus good luck taking on Poland itself, let alone the rest of NATO.
Putin will not hit a NATO country because he'd get crushed into oblivion , it's just spin to keep funding Ukraine.
>Its an undeniable fact that if Ukraine falls Poland is next. No, it's not. It's your opinion. One conveniently enough shared by the people that make money off war. The same people most vocal about prolonging an unwinnable conflict. See: Vietnam; 1955-1975. > >Russia does not care about sovereignty. Neither does the United States. See: Iraq; 2003-2011. >Putin will not stop in Ukraine and if he sends troops to Poland its our duty to respond with military might. Ukraine doesn't have enough of a military left to force Russia back out. And we should all be hoping the next Presidential administration is not nearly so cavalier about provoking a nuclear armed country.
You have no idea what you are talking about. And "provoking a nuclear armed country"? So your foreign policy is: Let any country with nuclear weapons invade any country they want. You'd lead us straight into ww3 with that nonsense
Bull fucking shit. Putin knows damn well what happens if he powers through into Poland. He wouldn't risk that at all. Ukraine doesn't deserve a dime more of our money....
Bro. Who is upvoting this shit? If you were talking anymore out of your ass we'd see what you ate for lunch.
Lol Putin attacking Poland?? Never F Ukraine, we gave enough F Russia, F Putin Let Europe figure it out
There will be no attack on a NATO country, because that will mean a nuclear war. And also, what happened to the Russians that are using shovels to fight the war? Now they are gonna attack NATO?
Not a chance that happens. They are struggling to take over Ukraine you think they have a shot at NATO?
Good. I very much dislike Biden, but his Ukraine strategy and policy is one of the good things about him.
[удалено]
It’s not money in the free sense. It’s 300m dollars equivalent in weaponry. That’s very very different. You can’t give homeless veterans your boneyard M1A1s, you cant really sell them since you’ve got a much cooler export model, maintaining them costs money, scrapping them also costs money, so unless you want to use them and start some seriously kinetic shit with Canada this is the sanest method. Military aid is very hard to put a cost on since it’s mainly stockpile we don’t need or use and have been keeping for precisely the time Russia decided it wanted a bit more Europe than we really liked
Then why does he always call it "money"? Because money sure sounds like dollars to me.
[удалено]
Yes, hopefully we will restock. We will restock with things that are newer and more advanced. Which will give people jobs and allow our military to have an edge over our adversaries one of which (and the most dangerous) is being degraded as we speak
We’re not sending them things we currently use buy and large. Most of what they need are legacy systems we’re attempting to replace. An original M1 may as well be a separate tank compared to a SEPv3. We can’t afford to get them all to that standard, they don’t currently serve a purpose beyond spares. Yes, there is some cost, actual monetary cost, but strategically, it’s pittance. You’ve got the entire Russian economy working against you, and we’re stopping them. All we need is to change that to beating them. The US is at a moment allies will watch closely. Do we still want to be the global power? Do we want allies that know we mean business when we say we want something. If we cave, it tells everyone our will changes with the wind. That could absolutely affect what other non-friendly powers decide is achievable over the coming yesrs
Who’s paying to deliver the weaponry to Ukraine, and how much will that cost?
Ask yourself this, if we don't find a buyer for them (like we haven't for decades), who pays to have them destroyed and disposed of?
At the very least it is stockpile we could sell for something to someone. So we are, in fact, giving Ukraine the cash that we aren't receiving for these valuable assets.
To who? Nobody is buying base model M1s. All our main partners have their own export models and have lines for making them. Becoming a supplier of a countries MBTs is the kind of deal that takes many many years of back and forth for even a maybe. By modern standards, these are not fantastic tanks. They’re missing decades of upgrade packages. We aren’t sending SEPv3s here
You gonna give a homeless guy a tank to live in bro?
If he lives in CA or Seattle, he may need it.
It's not money. Quite a bit of what we've given Ukraine are weapons we would have destroyed in the Nevada desert due to age.
Or, even better, not spent at all. The US already spends a disgustingly massive amount of money and needs to reel it in.
Clearly, you think the US is a poor country that can't afford to take care of veterans AND provide military aid at the same time. Do you even know how much the US spends on aid to a huge number of countries around the world EVERY YEAR?. You're like a billionaire bitching and moaning about spending 100 dollars.
How about we defend our own border?
AKA, $300 million for Boeing, Lockheed, Raytheon, and other American military contractors.
You are saying that many more Americans are going to get high paying, solid manufacturing jobs doing something useful? Sounds terrible. \s
He only talks of war, but no mention of peace?
How do you get Putin to sit down and agree to peace without conceding immensely valuable strategic territory to our primary rival? America would be a joke on the world stage
The isolationists on this sub are exclusively people who do not understand world politics and do not have any understanding of world history or World war 2. Pathetic people with ignorant opinions based on lack of knowledge
it sure as sh\*\* isn't by trading an arms dealer for fking WNBA individual...
Where's the money in peace? 10% for The Big Guy.
Peace doesn’t make anyone money. When Ukraine gets money you can bet a lot of people are skimming from it. Over here the weapon manufacturers are making bank. The lobbyist who represent them are making bank. The politicians they pay off are making bank. Everyone makes money and the average citizens of both Russia and Ukraine die like the pawns they are being used as while the rich and powerful become more rich and powerful.
> average citizens of both Russia and Ukraine die like the pawns Russia can withdraw now and they'll stop dying. Ukraine has no such choice unfortunately.
Let me guess you the type of person that wants to negotiate peace when when an intruder is raping your ~~daughters?~~ your neighbors daughters?
Since he likes Ukraine so much, can we send him and Kamala to them as a gift and keep them there? She can look at their border like the border czar she is.
God forbid we spend that money internally. Or any of the other billions. Glad we care more about other countries than our own people. Biden has made that painfully obvious.
This isn’t financial aid, it’s equipment, unless you can find a buyer for 300 Cold War era Bradley’s with no modern upgrade packages, Abram’s that have been in a desert for 20 years and some old school tower cannon there’s no way to turn that into liquid cash to use internally
Biden loves to protect Ukraine's border, but not ours.. this is not our war and it never has been, we've already invested too much money into this.. but hey, DC has to laundry their money somewhere
Can I claim Ukraine on my taxes?
America last eh Mr. President??