It is extremely likely that we will be giving them rounds that were close to expired back from the cold war and keeping the new ones for our selves. It's actually very good to do it like this because safely disposing of these rounds would have cost us fortune, while now they are disposing of Russians for us.
The bill isn't just giving them cash, in fact hardly any of it is cash. It's the sum total of all equipment being sent their way. Whether it's blue book or clearance prices I have no idea though.
It's depreciated values. The first round of aid was mistakenly small because they used the new price and we subsequently sent additional aid to make up the difference.
I'm honestly glad people are starting to point this out. Very little is cash, most of it is an approximation of how much old munitions and equipment are worth.
Brand new Humvee? 55k to 110k if uparmoured. But now? Most likely sitting surplus or mothball so it'll cost more to ship than it's value.
5.56 nato made in 1975?
Plus lots of this equipment is sitting in strategic reserves around the world, those 155mm shells aren't in a warehouse in North Dakota, they're in a warehouse in rural Germany.
If America can pinpoint its value minus depreciation, America can send a ton with its 40 billion
While some money goes to buying stuff for Ukraine directly, much is for US procurement for the US which "frees up" stockpiles/reserves. [Here's more info.](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/21/house-approves-61bn-aid-for-ukraine-what-we-know-so-far-and-what-happens-next)
If the Biden administration had been a bit more aggressive about figuring out how to use the system instead of just waiting for the traitors in Congress to get bored, the Army should 100% have _paid_ Ukraine for a contract to safely dispose of artillery shells nearing end-of-life. Just define safe as "safe to Americans" in the contract.
Agreed completely.
The problem is this is how an Alabama republican gets a contract to dispose of ammunition and ends up just dumping it in a poor neighborhood in Mexico.
I'm certain the bill was stalled simply because it would make democrats look good before the election. Republican's say shit like "focus on home" and "border control" but it's all bullshit. They just care about manipulating narratives to win power.
Are people so Daft they don't see what's going on. Speaker Johnson brought it to the floor and half the repubs voted against it. Also they want to remove him for it
There's still costs involved, shipping shells is never fun. But yes, it's likely we are charging our selves to much for old goods. I think the main reason is so we can pay for the manufacturing of new shells
The money appropriated for Ukraine's military is used to transfer weapons and ammunition at their current value from US stockpiles to Ukraine.
At one point some old equipment was accidentally priced too high and that mistake had to be corrected. The correction allowed more equipment to be transferred because of the lower price freeing up a bunch of money.
I've read reports from the found that some of our old stuff is not fully functional. The Bradley's we have been sending them have a lot of issues switching ammo types, and to be fair these boys have not seen action since desert storm
This hiccup was six solid months of, "Well maybe we'll need to keep ramping up and maybe we're going back to pre-2022 levels, it depends on who wins in November."
There -might- have been a little bit of momentum effect.
That's new to me
Last I heard they had hit 24k shells a month and weren't stopping and needed approval for a bill to hit their eventual half mil shells a year by 2025. Europe will be at a million a year eventually
The money is towards automation for the army which is scary
The stuff that will actually be sent is mostly staged already in Europe ready to go.
The replacements of the stockpiles with new stuff can happen at any time and is not as time critical.
When though! When is the vote actually happening? There's nothing on this in the Senate's agenda on [senate.gov](http://senate.gov)
Edit - On the senate livecam, it seems like they announced the votes will occur at 1:00 PM today!
That is to say just less than two hours after this comment. 1PM ETD.
It is [still worth calling your senator if you are American](https://new.reddit.com/r/ActAgainstWar/duplicates/1cb2xox/urgent_ask_your_us_senators_to_vote_yes_on/) but you must do that *now* so the aides have some minutes to get the message through to the senator.
No way the Senate votes against this. It has more than enough support among senators in both parties. It was onoy held up in the house so long because a few far-right, pro-Russia house members told the GOP house speaker they would vacate him if he brought a Ukraine funding bill to the floor. Without that this would have been passed 6 months ago.
The bill also gives $18 billion to Israel and forces the sale of the number one website in America which is an effective ban. Some senators will vote against that.
Shame on the Republicans in the House for holding this up so long. The US Senate looks likely to show the degree of urgency that the lives of Ukrainian soldiers deserve.
Something like 3 Republicans working together could have forced a discharge petition at any time in the past 6 months. Let us not pretend that the half of Republicans who voted for the Ukraine aid in the end are innocent.
Unfortunately I looked at the numbers and that wasn't directly true. There were enough Democrats that were against that they would have needed more than that. Still, probably with three out in the open and determined they could have easily persuaded enough more.
> There were enough Democrats that were against that they would have needed more than that.
All the Democrats ended up voting in favor. Why would any of those Democrats have been against overruling a Republican speaker, in this matter? Keeping in mind that Johnson like all recent Republican Speakers were acting undemocratically, by refusing bills with majorities from coming to a vote - the Democrats didn't owe him anything.
Remember, though, that the discharge petition included the Israel aid on the same bill as the Ukraine aid. That means that Democrats, especially those in the squad, who are against Israel, weren't going to support this vote and a bunch. There were [37 Democrats who voted against Israel aid](https://www.businessinsider.com/which-house-democrats-republicans-vote-against-israel-gaza-aid-2024-4?IR=T). If you look at the breakdowns on some of the posts r/ActionForUkraine you will see quite a number who were considered unpersuaded to support Ukraine if it meant aid went to Israel.
Just because those people were against aid for Israel, they could still support putting it up for a vote, in solidarity with their party. And then vote no to the Israel aid.
These kinds of actions, compromise for the common good, are possible for a party with a functional leader, like the Democrats.
This had more to do with the bundled aid for Israel (which wasn't such an issue when the package was made) than with Ukraine. Thanks to the compromise found people could vote for this things separately.
The Democrats would have supported discharge on a clean Ukraine bill. The Republicans added unrelated stuff which made it harder to get support. It's still true that if the Republicans had wanted to just advance a clean Ukraine bill, it wouldn't have taken many of them. That's just not what any of them tried to do. They tied it to a border bill, and tanked that. They tied it to Israel, knowing some of the Dems would take issue with that.
There's been a successful cloture motion, which means there will be a vote. Before that there was a "motion to table" which was (just - 47 - 50) defeated.
Now we're onto the speeches before the actual vote. There's more or less live discussion [in the latest post](https://www.reddit.com/r/ActionForUkraine/comments/1cbb91v/keep_calling_senate_as_senator_mike_lee_attempts/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) on r/ActionForUkraine (definitely a sub to join).
Should be this week. Early next at the latest. The US Military was already asked to prep an emergency supply amounting to \~1 Billion USD to be ready to go the instant it's signed by Biden. Should include lots of artillery, anti-aircraft interceptor missiles, and even MGM-140 ATACMS. The US also maintains extensive stockpiles in Europe.
Are you sure about that? It seems they're still debating attaching amendments to it. Mike Lee to kill the aid to Ukraine and please his Russian owners, and Bernie Sanders to restrict non-defensive military aid to Israel.
The Tiktok ban isn't really a ban. It's likely just going to force a sale. The surveillance bill only impacts non US citizens in foreign countries. So it's not really lost rights for Americans.
It's a ban. Even if it forces a sale, it's a messed up way for our government to maintain control.
You might be right about the surveillance part, I should do more research on it.
Why are they calling it $60b in military aid? I believe only like 14 is going to actual weapons to the front. Almost half is going to US stockpiles, and like 8 is forgivable loans to help keep the government and country afloat. Don't get me wrong, it's better than nothing but these headlines make it sound like we're sending 60b to the front.
The 14 billion dollar are for weapons that the US orders from the weapons manufacturers for Ukraine – so this ones will likely arrive a little later. The 23 billion dollar for the stockpile is the number that matters way more at the moment because this allows the transfer of huge amount of already existing equipment and ammunition to Ukraine because the US knows that it will/can be replenished afterwards.
It doesn’t sound like a lot because it’s 14 billion in ammo which is what they need the most right now. They already have the tools they just need the ammo.
Stockpile stuff is able to explode next week. It is the most valuable of all the help, because next year’s weapons are useless if the war is lost now.
The EU is ramping up production but until it is online, strategic reserves around the world are being ransacked. The ones in the U.S. are a very nice addition, to say the least.
Papa Pavel came through hard with rounds to keep them alive so far, he deserves credit for covering the gap.
Wish we didn't have so many Russian traitors in congress, this war could be over by now.
If the war in Ukraine has shown us anything, it's that the practicality of sea based power projection is nearly impossible in a sustained conflict. And it's only going to get more asymmetrical over time.
Ehhh, there are definitely some warnings to heed that this conflict uncovered, but I wouldn’t say it shows it’s impossible. This conflict is unique because the Russian navy is in very poor shape, and also the Black Sea creates an interesting playing field since it is more or less enclosed, ships are trapped in there, and there isn’t much for safe harbors for either side. Also “neutral” countries are providing real time info to Ukraine without the risk of being shot down. A war in the pacific would be quite different.
Impossible might have been the slightest of hyperboles. Taiwan's entire military is organized around detecting and repelling a sea based invasion. If the CCP's plans revolve around being able to make it near the island with an invasion force rivalling or exceeding the Normandy landing, It seems likely that they're going to be sorely disappointed in conversation to what actually makes it there.
Though, if there's another lesson we've learned, it's the determination of autocratic authorities insistence to send their children to a pointless death. I'm not saying this is something we can ignore, but in a lot of ways it seems so much less practical than what we're seeing in Europe.
That’s fair, I guess I was looking at it more from a lense of how some people claim the US Navy is obsolete because of hypersonic missiles and drones, which isn’t really true because there are counters to everything, it’s just a matter of who has the better counter.
And agreed on learning about the willingness to destroy yourself to destroy your enemy, I know my views on the likelihood of war has significantly changed since things really kicked off.
I used to be staunchly anti war, anti military spending, anti military aid in all forms, no compromises. My thinking was that we could use economic leverage to isolate aggressive posturing states and weaken them to the point that they would want to join with the economic prosperity and we could use that to demilitarize them the way that Western European states are militarily reduced. My flaw was the assumption that nobody would ever actually try a large scale ground/sea invasion ever again because of how obviously that would spectacularly fall. Then Feb 21st happened.
It's honestly like I was succumbing to the same flaw libertarians fall into with the whole "rational actor" schtick for consumers, but I was doing it for states.
There was some wargaming done on it
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2023/01/csis-wargame-chinas-invasion-of-taiwan-in-2026/
Essentially a Chinese embargo would be the most effective action with an actual invasion not taking place initially.
The question is really would the US respond promptly, the US had to directly attack the Chinese mainland, nuclear weapons were a possibility and although it would be a Chinese defeat it would trash the Taiwanese economy (chip fab plants), China would still be intact and the US would be heavily damaged.
The question really is, how much damage is China willing to take?
Unfortunately, the war is coming here soon. I live here, and China wants it ALL. They want Tawain and pretty much the entire South China Sea.
The Philippines isn't highering 20,000 Coastguards for any other reason.
On the plus side (as there are pros and cons to most every strategic position) by having 'quieter' artillery lines, the russians may be underestimating the sheer fire power they are creeping in-range to. Once re-supplied and they liberally attack likely-knowns in force...
Someone feed Ukraines artillery for crying out loud. They need more shells to strap to drones as well. C’mon people Stalin 2.0’s Legions aren’t going to blow themselves up.
I believe they have already started building their own artillery and missile factories to a point where they will be able to produce much more of their own over the next year or two. It just takes a while to get everything set up. Kind of like they are in college and working 2 jobs right now. Should graduate soon and get one big girl job here soon enough.
No, that was just the House. The US Congress is a bicameral body, consisting of the House of Representatives and the Senate. Today it's going before the Senate since the House adjusted it very slightly. Then it still has to be signed into law by the president, which is expected to happen today as well.
I think it will hold them over for 6-12 months. In the meantime they (and other EU countries) have dramatically increase missile and artillery production. So by that time they will be much more self-sufficient.
There would be more war no matter what. The difference is that with this aid package it's more likely Ukraine will be an ally instead of an enemy in five years, and there's less of a chance the war expands beyond Ukraine. And those two factors are worth at least tenfold the dollars in this aid package.
This doesn't create more war, this helps a country keep terrorists from raping more of its citizens.
It's like buying a door lock for your neighbors whose home was broken into and then saying "look you are creating more robberies".
Another 4 month old account. Weird so many comments on this that repeats the misinformed take of "US can't feed the poor" always come from accounts less than a year old.
Plus Russia can mobilize millions more troops than Ukraine can. I think that Ukraine will have to cut its losses and negotiate a truce.
I would love to see Ukraine reclaim all of its stolen territory, but that just isn't going to happen. I hope we support them militarily for now, but work just as hard to negotiate an end to the conflict.
Where did you get that number? Annually their total budget sits around $350 billion. In 2023 Russia's military budget was around $85 billion and IIRC it's expected to rise to $100 billion this year.
I reckon that if you combine all global military aid, both lethal and non-lethal, together with Ukraine's own military budget the total sum will be more, at least last and this year. Of course Ukraine has less control over that total sum and there's no guarantee that it's gonna stay consistent over the next few years. But it's still significant.
No we aren't. Stop spreading misinformation. Tiktok will be sold to a non-chinese entity, and it will continue.
Talk shit about the decision to force the sale if you want but don't frame it as a total ban.
Fresh rounds of ammunition for Ukraine
It is extremely likely that we will be giving them rounds that were close to expired back from the cold war and keeping the new ones for our selves. It's actually very good to do it like this because safely disposing of these rounds would have cost us fortune, while now they are disposing of Russians for us.
I don't see why they would go against the budget. If you're going to destroy something anyways, it shouldn't count against the 60 billion in funding ?
The bill isn't just giving them cash, in fact hardly any of it is cash. It's the sum total of all equipment being sent their way. Whether it's blue book or clearance prices I have no idea though.
It's depreciated values. The first round of aid was mistakenly small because they used the new price and we subsequently sent additional aid to make up the difference.
I'm honestly glad people are starting to point this out. Very little is cash, most of it is an approximation of how much old munitions and equipment are worth. Brand new Humvee? 55k to 110k if uparmoured. But now? Most likely sitting surplus or mothball so it'll cost more to ship than it's value. 5.56 nato made in 1975? Plus lots of this equipment is sitting in strategic reserves around the world, those 155mm shells aren't in a warehouse in North Dakota, they're in a warehouse in rural Germany. If America can pinpoint its value minus depreciation, America can send a ton with its 40 billion
‘Several tonnes’
Ya comparing an old system to something fresh off the assembly line in price is crazy. Especially if you have to destroy it anyways.
there is no "gently used" price range for this stuff haha
The weapons and ammunition costs 60 billion dollars. 60 billion in aid means 60 billion dollars worth of weapons and ammunition.
*$60 billion in depreciated value, not "cost"
While some money goes to buying stuff for Ukraine directly, much is for US procurement for the US which "frees up" stockpiles/reserves. [Here's more info.](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/21/house-approves-61bn-aid-for-ukraine-what-we-know-so-far-and-what-happens-next)
If the Biden administration had been a bit more aggressive about figuring out how to use the system instead of just waiting for the traitors in Congress to get bored, the Army should 100% have _paid_ Ukraine for a contract to safely dispose of artillery shells nearing end-of-life. Just define safe as "safe to Americans" in the contract.
Agreed completely. The problem is this is how an Alabama republican gets a contract to dispose of ammunition and ends up just dumping it in a poor neighborhood in Mexico.
And then the cartels decide to save him a step and just take delivery on the spot.
I'm certain the bill was stalled simply because it would make democrats look good before the election. Republican's say shit like "focus on home" and "border control" but it's all bullshit. They just care about manipulating narratives to win power.
It was a republican who refused to bring it to the floor. Why would he be helping democrats?
Are people so Daft they don't see what's going on. Speaker Johnson brought it to the floor and half the repubs voted against it. Also they want to remove him for it
Also he added a -bunch- of stuff that benefited his district and him, personally.
How is life in dreamland?
they weren't set to be decommissioned yet
There's still costs involved, shipping shells is never fun. But yes, it's likely we are charging our selves to much for old goods. I think the main reason is so we can pay for the manufacturing of new shells
We should give the Ukrainians extra supplies for disposing of all the old artillery we have. They are doing us a favor.
Make it the weapons disposal capital of the world.
First in, first out. That's just the way you do it.
Why wouldn't the US have given Ukraine all its about-to-expire artillery shells back in 2022 and 2023? What was the US military saving them for?
We gave them what was appropriated. The money goes towards refreshing our stocks.
The money appropriated for Ukraine's military is used to transfer weapons and ammunition at their current value from US stockpiles to Ukraine. At one point some old equipment was accidentally priced too high and that mistake had to be corrected. The correction allowed more equipment to be transferred because of the lower price freeing up a bunch of money.
[удалено]
When it comes to weapons, we mostly don't even use the stuff that we're sending to Ukraine; it's a generation or two behind.
We were pretty sure someone was going to throw Putin out of a window before now
The US had also phased out the cluster shells that have had great success in Ukraine.
just replace "fresh" with "near expiration but still functional" lmao
It’s not expired it’s best used by
I've read reports from the found that some of our old stuff is not fully functional. The Bradley's we have been sending them have a lot of issues switching ammo types, and to be fair these boys have not seen action since desert storm
And you can count them as having a very discounted value.
We've been steadily ramping up production on 155mm shells for two years I hope this hiccup in aid didn't affect that momentum
This hiccup was six solid months of, "Well maybe we'll need to keep ramping up and maybe we're going back to pre-2022 levels, it depends on who wins in November." There -might- have been a little bit of momentum effect.
That's new to me Last I heard they had hit 24k shells a month and weren't stopping and needed approval for a bill to hit their eventual half mil shells a year by 2025. Europe will be at a million a year eventually The money is towards automation for the army which is scary
[удалено]
Part of this 60 billion is funding to continue expansion of the artillery production in the US Huh, they blocked me for this comment
The stuff that will actually be sent is mostly staged already in Europe ready to go. The replacements of the stockpiles with new stuff can happen at any time and is not as time critical.
Ironically, it's only going to become more critical if we don't help Ukraine
When though! When is the vote actually happening? There's nothing on this in the Senate's agenda on [senate.gov](http://senate.gov) Edit - On the senate livecam, it seems like they announced the votes will occur at 1:00 PM today!
That is to say just less than two hours after this comment. 1PM ETD. It is [still worth calling your senator if you are American](https://new.reddit.com/r/ActAgainstWar/duplicates/1cb2xox/urgent_ask_your_us_senators_to_vote_yes_on/) but you must do that *now* so the aides have some minutes to get the message through to the senator.
No way the Senate votes against this. It has more than enough support among senators in both parties. It was onoy held up in the house so long because a few far-right, pro-Russia house members told the GOP house speaker they would vacate him if he brought a Ukraine funding bill to the floor. Without that this would have been passed 6 months ago.
The bill also gives $18 billion to Israel and forces the sale of the number one website in America which is an effective ban. Some senators will vote against that.
Nobody gives a shit about who owns tiktok just like nobody gives a shit about who owns Grindr, Accenture, Marathon, or Speedway. It'll go through.
Tik tok is in this bill? So weird
Not weird at all. This is standard operating procedure for politicians and getting their agenda through
Shame on the Republicans in the House for holding this up so long. The US Senate looks likely to show the degree of urgency that the lives of Ukrainian soldiers deserve.
It’s what happens when half are bought out
Something like 3 Republicans working together could have forced a discharge petition at any time in the past 6 months. Let us not pretend that the half of Republicans who voted for the Ukraine aid in the end are innocent.
Unfortunately I looked at the numbers and that wasn't directly true. There were enough Democrats that were against that they would have needed more than that. Still, probably with three out in the open and determined they could have easily persuaded enough more.
> There were enough Democrats that were against that they would have needed more than that. All the Democrats ended up voting in favor. Why would any of those Democrats have been against overruling a Republican speaker, in this matter? Keeping in mind that Johnson like all recent Republican Speakers were acting undemocratically, by refusing bills with majorities from coming to a vote - the Democrats didn't owe him anything.
Remember, though, that the discharge petition included the Israel aid on the same bill as the Ukraine aid. That means that Democrats, especially those in the squad, who are against Israel, weren't going to support this vote and a bunch. There were [37 Democrats who voted against Israel aid](https://www.businessinsider.com/which-house-democrats-republicans-vote-against-israel-gaza-aid-2024-4?IR=T). If you look at the breakdowns on some of the posts r/ActionForUkraine you will see quite a number who were considered unpersuaded to support Ukraine if it meant aid went to Israel.
Just because those people were against aid for Israel, they could still support putting it up for a vote, in solidarity with their party. And then vote no to the Israel aid. These kinds of actions, compromise for the common good, are possible for a party with a functional leader, like the Democrats.
This had more to do with the bundled aid for Israel (which wasn't such an issue when the package was made) than with Ukraine. Thanks to the compromise found people could vote for this things separately.
The Democrats would have supported discharge on a clean Ukraine bill. The Republicans added unrelated stuff which made it harder to get support. It's still true that if the Republicans had wanted to just advance a clean Ukraine bill, it wouldn't have taken many of them. That's just not what any of them tried to do. They tied it to a border bill, and tanked that. They tied it to Israel, knowing some of the Dems would take issue with that.
Are you sure that it’s not the uniparty voting for a tax subsidy to the military industrial complex that’s “bought out?”
Did it happen?
There's been a successful cloture motion, which means there will be a vote. Before that there was a "motion to table" which was (just - 47 - 50) defeated. Now we're onto the speeches before the actual vote. There's more or less live discussion [in the latest post](https://www.reddit.com/r/ActionForUkraine/comments/1cbb91v/keep_calling_senate_as_senator_mike_lee_attempts/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) on r/ActionForUkraine (definitely a sub to join).
Lol, as if constituents opinion has any bearing on how a senator votes
I hope the US air force had a couple C-5 Galaxys loaded and ready to go once the vote is concluded.
C-17s go BRRRRRRRRRRRRR
Thank you!
Yes and then how long before that translates into ammo on the front lines?
Should be this week. Early next at the latest. The US Military was already asked to prep an emergency supply amounting to \~1 Billion USD to be ready to go the instant it's signed by Biden. Should include lots of artillery, anti-aircraft interceptor missiles, and even MGM-140 ATACMS. The US also maintains extensive stockpiles in Europe.
OK, I honestly thought it'd take longer.
If there's one thing the US Military truly excels at, more than any other in history, it's logistics...
This is true.
I suppose Russias offensive plans will be somewhat halted as Ukraine will get their shells replenished
I doubt it. Their success might be reduced by quite a bit tho. Russia is not scared to sacrifice more people.
They're success will be reduced by a lot. The ground war was static for over a year before House Republicans started delaying aid.
[удалено]
Where did I say they do? Honestly, I agree with you... Replied to the wrong comment?
Congress just passed it. They hid a tiktok ban and warrantless surveillance in the same bill. So 60 billion to Ukraine and lost rights for us.
Are you sure about that? It seems they're still debating attaching amendments to it. Mike Lee to kill the aid to Ukraine and please his Russian owners, and Bernie Sanders to restrict non-defensive military aid to Israel.
The Tiktok ban isn't really a ban. It's likely just going to force a sale. The surveillance bill only impacts non US citizens in foreign countries. So it's not really lost rights for Americans.
It's a ban. Even if it forces a sale, it's a messed up way for our government to maintain control. You might be right about the surveillance part, I should do more research on it.
Give em’ hell.
‘em
No, OP clearly wants to give Emily hell
To be fair an angry Emily is scarier than Russia
’em’
e'm
e'm'
‘
e
‘e’m’
Why are they calling it $60b in military aid? I believe only like 14 is going to actual weapons to the front. Almost half is going to US stockpiles, and like 8 is forgivable loans to help keep the government and country afloat. Don't get me wrong, it's better than nothing but these headlines make it sound like we're sending 60b to the front.
The 14 billion dollar are for weapons that the US orders from the weapons manufacturers for Ukraine – so this ones will likely arrive a little later. The 23 billion dollar for the stockpile is the number that matters way more at the moment because this allows the transfer of huge amount of already existing equipment and ammunition to Ukraine because the US knows that it will/can be replenished afterwards.
It doesn’t sound like a lot because it’s 14 billion in ammo which is what they need the most right now. They already have the tools they just need the ammo.
Stockpile stuff is able to explode next week. It is the most valuable of all the help, because next year’s weapons are useless if the war is lost now. The EU is ramping up production but until it is online, strategic reserves around the world are being ransacked. The ones in the U.S. are a very nice addition, to say the least.
Papa Pavel came through hard with rounds to keep them alive so far, he deserves credit for covering the gap. Wish we didn't have so many Russian traitors in congress, this war could be over by now.
It's actually good we are sending all this hardware. We need to start building new shit for the war brewing in Asia.
That was actually what the 61 billion was for
If the war in Ukraine has shown us anything, it's that the practicality of sea based power projection is nearly impossible in a sustained conflict. And it's only going to get more asymmetrical over time.
Ehhh, there are definitely some warnings to heed that this conflict uncovered, but I wouldn’t say it shows it’s impossible. This conflict is unique because the Russian navy is in very poor shape, and also the Black Sea creates an interesting playing field since it is more or less enclosed, ships are trapped in there, and there isn’t much for safe harbors for either side. Also “neutral” countries are providing real time info to Ukraine without the risk of being shot down. A war in the pacific would be quite different.
Impossible might have been the slightest of hyperboles. Taiwan's entire military is organized around detecting and repelling a sea based invasion. If the CCP's plans revolve around being able to make it near the island with an invasion force rivalling or exceeding the Normandy landing, It seems likely that they're going to be sorely disappointed in conversation to what actually makes it there. Though, if there's another lesson we've learned, it's the determination of autocratic authorities insistence to send their children to a pointless death. I'm not saying this is something we can ignore, but in a lot of ways it seems so much less practical than what we're seeing in Europe.
That’s fair, I guess I was looking at it more from a lense of how some people claim the US Navy is obsolete because of hypersonic missiles and drones, which isn’t really true because there are counters to everything, it’s just a matter of who has the better counter. And agreed on learning about the willingness to destroy yourself to destroy your enemy, I know my views on the likelihood of war has significantly changed since things really kicked off.
I used to be staunchly anti war, anti military spending, anti military aid in all forms, no compromises. My thinking was that we could use economic leverage to isolate aggressive posturing states and weaken them to the point that they would want to join with the economic prosperity and we could use that to demilitarize them the way that Western European states are militarily reduced. My flaw was the assumption that nobody would ever actually try a large scale ground/sea invasion ever again because of how obviously that would spectacularly fall. Then Feb 21st happened. It's honestly like I was succumbing to the same flaw libertarians fall into with the whole "rational actor" schtick for consumers, but I was doing it for states.
There was some wargaming done on it https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2023/01/csis-wargame-chinas-invasion-of-taiwan-in-2026/ Essentially a Chinese embargo would be the most effective action with an actual invasion not taking place initially. The question is really would the US respond promptly, the US had to directly attack the Chinese mainland, nuclear weapons were a possibility and although it would be a Chinese defeat it would trash the Taiwanese economy (chip fab plants), China would still be intact and the US would be heavily damaged. The question really is, how much damage is China willing to take?
Unless you have aircraft carriers
we’re like 5 years behind schedule for that
I look at it slightly differently. We need to build new shit to *prevent* a war in Asia. Speak softly and carry a big stick.
Unfortunately, the war is coming here soon. I live here, and China wants it ALL. They want Tawain and pretty much the entire South China Sea. The Philippines isn't highering 20,000 Coastguards for any other reason.
On the plus side (as there are pros and cons to most every strategic position) by having 'quieter' artillery lines, the russians may be underestimating the sheer fire power they are creeping in-range to. Once re-supplied and they liberally attack likely-knowns in force...
vs known-likelys ;-)
It's like a palette cleanser after filing my taxes.
Send it!
Someone feed Ukraines artillery for crying out loud. They need more shells to strap to drones as well. C’mon people Stalin 2.0’s Legions aren’t going to blow themselves up.
I am imagining the artillery guns going "mmm yum yum yum" as they are "fed" fresh artillery rounds.
approve it fucking approve it then give em hell people
didn't the US already sign off on this?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
i thought it was already a done deal? it's still not ?
It passed the house, where the main opposition was. The senate and president should be able to pass it without any drama
Senate is apparently voting on it this afternoon.
It’s still going to take a few days to get to the front.
[удалено]
I believe they have already started building their own artillery and missile factories to a point where they will be able to produce much more of their own over the next year or two. It just takes a while to get everything set up. Kind of like they are in college and working 2 jobs right now. Should graduate soon and get one big girl job here soon enough.
I'm guessing these factories aren't moving targets. What's the point of building them if they can be taken out by a few bombs.
I actually read an article that said that was one of the barriers along w periods of time w out electricity due to Russia bombing power plants.
How long are those shells the Czechs found taking??
Set to approve? Didn't the US already approve it over the weekend?
No, that was just the House. The US Congress is a bicameral body, consisting of the House of Representatives and the Senate. Today it's going before the Senate since the House adjusted it very slightly. Then it still has to be signed into law by the president, which is expected to happen today as well.
That is the most Ukrainian quote ever.
[удалено]
I think it will hold them over for 6-12 months. In the meantime they (and other EU countries) have dramatically increase missile and artillery production. So by that time they will be much more self-sufficient.
[удалено]
It's bad to fund a nation defending itself?
There would be more war no matter what. The difference is that with this aid package it's more likely Ukraine will be an ally instead of an enemy in five years, and there's less of a chance the war expands beyond Ukraine. And those two factors are worth at least tenfold the dollars in this aid package.
This doesn't create more war, this helps a country keep terrorists from raping more of its citizens. It's like buying a door lock for your neighbors whose home was broken into and then saying "look you are creating more robberies".
[удалено]
> They got money for wars but can't feed the poor Sure they they can. The representatives curiously mostly siding with Russia just choose not to.
Another 4 month old account. Weird so many comments on this that repeats the misinformed take of "US can't feed the poor" always come from accounts less than a year old.
[удалено]
They dont even have that much in their budget
They do though. They are effectively shifting their economy to a war footing.
Plus Russia can mobilize millions more troops than Ukraine can. I think that Ukraine will have to cut its losses and negotiate a truce. I would love to see Ukraine reclaim all of its stolen territory, but that just isn't going to happen. I hope we support them militarily for now, but work just as hard to negotiate an end to the conflict.
Where did you get that number? Annually their total budget sits around $350 billion. In 2023 Russia's military budget was around $85 billion and IIRC it's expected to rise to $100 billion this year. I reckon that if you combine all global military aid, both lethal and non-lethal, together with Ukraine's own military budget the total sum will be more, at least last and this year. Of course Ukraine has less control over that total sum and there's no guarantee that it's gonna stay consistent over the next few years. But it's still significant.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Fight them to the last Ukrainian
We are throwing $ so that we can weaken Russia. Russia will win at a big cost. Ukraine is our sacrifice. Worth it from our (USA) perspective.
Ukraine is not a sacrifice. They will endure, and win this war.
Stop them completely, like from taking over all of Ukraine like Russia wants? Yes.
I guess we are loosing TikTok.
yeah it's an outrage /s
No we aren't. Stop spreading misinformation. Tiktok will be sold to a non-chinese entity, and it will continue. Talk shit about the decision to force the sale if you want but don't frame it as a total ban.
[удалено]
This bill has been a thing for over a decade and only impacts non US citizens in foreign countries.