(10-20-2022 03:11 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

Quote:Amid concerns that a new Congress could take a more skeptical view of aid to Ukraine, lawmakers from both parties are looking to lock in billions of dollars in military assistance to Kyiv before newly elected members are sworn in in January, according to a lawmaker and congressional staffers.

House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy of California, who is poised to take over as speaker if the GOP wins a majority in the House in the November midterm elections, warned this week that his fellow party members are “not going to write a blank check to Ukraine.”

With that threat to Ukraine aid looming, the bipartisan idea under consideration would use a government funding bill during the lame-duck session after the midterms to secure a much higher level of military and other assistance than prior aid packages for Ukraine, according to the lawmaker and the aides.

Congress last month approved $12 billion in military and economic aid to Ukraine, but the package being contemplated would be dramatically larger, the sources said.

The amount would be enough “to make sure [Ukraine] can get through the year,” a Republican senator with knowledge of the matter told NBC News. “It’ll make the $12 billion look like pocket change.”

The new aid package, which most likely would be part of an omnibus spending bill, could be within the range of roughly $50 billion, congressional aides and a source close to the Ukraine government said. The Biden administration has not yet made a formal request for new funding.

Congress has allocated a total of $65 billion in funding to Ukraine since Russia attacked the country in February.

‘Put your own oxygen mask on’
Many Republican candidates endorsed by former President Donald Trump have questioned the amount of U.S. aid delivered to Ukraine to help it fend off Russian forces, which invaded the country in February. They argue that the U.S. has more pressing domestic problems, that Ukraine’s fate is not tied to U.S. national interests and that European allies should be delivering a larger share of the weapons and other assistance to Kyiv.

House conservatives argue America needs to shore up its southern border and address the illegal immigration before worrying about Ukraine’s border with Russia.

“My constituents are saying, ‘Why are we more worried about Ukraine’s borders than we are about America’s borders?’ My constituents are not sitting there going, ‘Gosh, we have to save Ukraine’s borders,’” Rep. Warren Davidson, R-Ohio, a member of the conservative Trump-aligned Freedom Caucus, said in an interview.

Like Davidson, conservative Rep. Kat Cammack, R-Fla., said her heart breaks for the Ukrainian people, but she has not voted for recent Ukraine aid packages and isn’t inclined to do so next year if Republicans take control of the House, as most polls predict.

“I liken it to the airline videos they do before you take off: You need to put your own oxygen mask on before helping others,” Cammack, a member of the Homeland Security Committee, told NBC News. “And I just don’t think as a legislator that I could, in good conscience, support billions and billions of funding going overseas when we have such dire needs here.”

Link

What a time to be an industrial weapons manufacturer

US Announces $275 million In New Military Assistance For Ukraine

Quote:The United States will provide a new $275 million military assistance package for Ukraine to help it battle Russia’s invasion, the Pentagon announced on Friday.

The package includes ammunition for Himars precision rocket launchers, various types of 155 mm artillery rounds, anti-armor systems, small arms ammunition and four satellite communications antennas, Deputy Pentagon Press Secretary Sabrina Singh told journalists.

“We’re seeing Ukrainian infrastructure and electrical grids being targeted by the Russians and these antennas provide an additional capability on the ground at a critical time when Ukraine’s infrastructure is being hit,” Singh said.

They are not, however, intended as a substitute for the Starlink service provided by Elon Musk’s SpaceX company, and have “nothing to do in terms of access to Starlink,” she said.

Musk said earlier this month that SpaceX could not continue funding Starlink in Ukraine indefinitely, creating uncertainty surrounding a service that has provided a vital communications capability for Kyiv’s forces.

But the world’s richest man quickly reversed course, saying SpaceX will continue to pay even though Starlink is losing money.

The latest aid package brings Washington’s total security assistance commitments for Ukraine to more than $18.5 billion since early 2021, and nearly $18 billion since Russia invaded in February.

While Im all for sending weapons to Ukraine----Its hard to argue we have money to send 50 billion to Ukraine but cant find 3 or 4 billion to finish the wall and protect our southern border. Hopefully, any Ukraine bill in 2023 (assuming we get a Republican Congress---and I think we will) will have additional protections for the southern border attached to it.

Gotta love The Bee

https://babylonbee.com/news/respect-for-...to-ukraine

(11-22-2022 10:57 AM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

The democrats need case for the Georgia run-off.

So I'm a little torn the more I think about this. On one hand that's a piss-load of money that could have been spent domestically, though the dems would have spent it on green energy bs and it would have ended up wasted anyways or lining the pockets of their buddies. On the other hand, it's a really small amount of money to have essentially decimated Russia's military. It's now a 2 man race with the US and China. Russia really can't do anything on the world stage besides go nuclear and I don't think even Putin wants to go there. Funding and re-supplying Ukraine through the winter is essential. Russia will do just enough to make things miserable in Ukraine and keep them from repairing infrastructure, all while regrouping and resupplying over the winter for a spring offensive.

(11-22-2022 12:43 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  So I'm a little torn the more I think about this. On one hand that's a piss-load of money that could have been spent domestically, though the dems would have spent it on green energy bs and it would have ended up wasted anyways or lining the pockets of their buddies. On the other hand, it's a really small amount of money to have essentially decimated Russia's military. It's now a 2 man race with the US and China. Russia really can't do anything on the world stage besides go nuclear and I don't think even Putin wants to go there. Funding and re-supplying Ukraine through the winter is essential. Russia will do just enough to make things miserable in Ukraine and keep them from repairing infrastructure, all while regrouping and resupplying over the winter for a spring offensive.

The U.S. tops the list of military spending by country.

Military Spending by Country 2022

Top 10 Countries with the Highest Military Expenditures (2020):

1. United States — $778 billion
2. China — $252 billion [estimated]
3. India — $72.9 billion
4. Russia — $61.7 billion
5. United Kingdom — $59.2 billion
6. Saudi Arabia — $57.5 billion [estimated]
7. Germany — $52.8 billion
8. France — $52.7 billion
9. Japan — $49.1 billion
10. South Korea — $45.7 billion
    

Not only does the U.S. spend more than any other nation individually, but the U.S. spends more than the rest of the top 10 COMBINED.

$778 B > $703.6 B

It will be a while before the Chinese military is able to mount a somewhat formidable attack on the U.S.

And the exposure of the Russian military, which was once considered a super power, as nothing more than a semi-effective regional power has to make China reconsider whether it is really a super power or simply another also-ran.

Lol, we’ve given Ukraine money and weapons for almost 10 years and people act like it’s some miracle they haven’t folded yet, when in reality, NATO is outspending Russias annual military budget every few months in Ukraine alone. And I doubt we even know about half of what has been sent/spent. That’s all fine, but as soon as we turn the tap off, it’s lights out for Ukraine. It’s all a matter of how much of our money we want to throw down that corruption and fraud rat hole.

(11-22-2022 12:51 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  Not only does the U.S. spend more than any other nation individually, but the U.S. spends more than the rest of the top 10 COMBINED.

Something we can all agree on. Cut the budget! But the problem is that all you hear from both sides, but especially the Republicans, is that we are falling behind and China is passing us. Let's start getting smart about the spending! I'm tired of hearing about how we are going to all die because China is going to pass our military next year.

(11-22-2022 12:51 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(11-22-2022 12:43 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  So I'm a little torn the more I think about this. On one hand that's a piss-load of money that could have been spent domestically, though the dems would have spent it on green energy bs and it would have ended up wasted anyways or lining the pockets of their buddies. On the other hand, it's a really small amount of money to have essentially decimated Russia's military. It's now a 2 man race with the US and China. Russia really can't do anything on the world stage besides go nuclear and I don't think even Putin wants to go there. Funding and re-supplying Ukraine through the winter is essential. Russia will do just enough to make things miserable in Ukraine and keep them from repairing infrastructure, all while regrouping and resupplying over the winter for a spring offensive.

The U.S. tops the list of military spending by country.

Military Spending by Country 2022

Top 10 Countries with the Highest Military Expenditures (2020):

1. United States — $778 billion
2. China — $252 billion [estimated]
3. India — $72.9 billion
4. Russia — $61.7 billion
5. United Kingdom — $59.2 billion
6. Saudi Arabia — $57.5 billion [estimated]
7. Germany — $52.8 billion
8. France — $52.7 billion
9. Japan — $49.1 billion
10. South Korea — $45.7 billion
    

Not only does the U.S. spend more than any other nation individually, but the U.S. spends more than the rest of the top 10 COMBINED.

$778 B > $703.6 B

It will be a while before the Chinese military is able to mount a somewhat formidable attack on the U.S.

And the exposure of the Russian military, which was once considered a super power, as nothing more than a semi-effective regional power has to make China reconsider whether it is really a super power or simply another also-ran.

China won't attack the US directly. They don't want a full on confrontation as they are still dependent on US dollars for the next few decades. China wants us out of the Pacific. Taiwan will be the first step. From there they will expand their sphere of influence mainly by intimidation through the Philippines, India, Australia, and finally over Japan and S. Korea. The presence of 75,000 US troops between Japan and S. Korea is the big deterrent for China.

I believe India is the big target for China to secure safe passage of ME oil. Whether economic or military means, eventually China will take India. With India secure, China can prop up Iran as a ME proxy and secure all the oil resources they need. Iran acts as an antagonist in the ME, forcing the US to expend military resources for our own oil needs while China makes mostly economic moves in Africa, securing rare-earth minerals.

Russia is an afterthought at this point. Technologically they can't compete with the US, Western Europe, or China. Militarily their only option is nuclear. China could prop them up so that they can continue antagonizing Western Europe, but ultimately that would be Putin playing second fiddle and being exploited. He won't go for that. Putin will agree to stay away from China, and China will agree to leave him alone - for the time being.

What the US needs is for Western Europe to be able to stand on their own against Russia (which it looks like they can if forced to) so that the US can focus on playing the long game with China. With the exception of the military, the US has a lot of catching up to do and we are only hurting ourselves by restricting our economic growth through climate driven agenda while allowing China to benefit from the very same policies.

As soon as the US has a hiccup, every country is just going to pounce and do what they want and take what they want and the US empire will be over, virtually overnight, without a fight. Like Britain, we’ll keep wasting our resources so we can feel like we have an empire still, but the BRICS countries and others are clearly going to rule the world at some point. And then all of the hangers one that US counts as “allies” will simply pivot to to the new powers. But we don’t have a Commonwealth to back us up. Europe would love to escape us. Brazil, Turkey, South Africa, India, Iran, and various Gulf States are already stepping in. The world will be reshaped into a multipolar world and days of the US picking off small countries one by one will be over. The WEF can keep trying, but without the CIA and US military working for them, they are going to be much weaker.

Russia isnt trying to rule the entire world by putting hundreds of bases all over and surrounding countries. And as it stands, we still waste our time and money needlessly provoking them time after time. And until we can get control of their central bank, assets and resources, we’re never going to leave them alone and they know it. They all lived thru the 90’s and saw what we did to them. But the US will run out of proxies to fight them before they run out of the will to survive. And we will be bankrupt, and they won’t.

(11-22-2022 02:23 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(11-22-2022 12:51 PM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(11-22-2022 12:43 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  So I'm a little torn the more I think about this. On one hand that's a piss-load of money that could have been spent domestically, though the dems would have spent it on green energy bs and it would have ended up wasted anyways or lining the pockets of their buddies. On the other hand, it's a really small amount of money to have essentially decimated Russia's military. It's now a 2 man race with the US and China. Russia really can't do anything on the world stage besides go nuclear and I don't think even Putin wants to go there. Funding and re-supplying Ukraine through the winter is essential. Russia will do just enough to make things miserable in Ukraine and keep them from repairing infrastructure, all while regrouping and resupplying over the winter for a spring offensive.

The U.S. tops the list of military spending by country.

Military Spending by Country 2022

Top 10 Countries with the Highest Military Expenditures (2020):

1. United States — $778 billion
2. China — $252 billion [estimated]
3. India — $72.9 billion
4. Russia — $61.7 billion
5. United Kingdom — $59.2 billion
6. Saudi Arabia — $57.5 billion [estimated]
7. Germany — $52.8 billion
8. France — $52.7 billion
9. Japan — $49.1 billion
10. South Korea — $45.7 billion
    

Not only does the U.S. spend more than any other nation individually, but the U.S. spends more than the rest of the top 10 COMBINED.

$778 B > $703.6 B

It will be a while before the Chinese military is able to mount a somewhat formidable attack on the U.S.
And the exposure of the Russian military, which was once considered a super power, as nothing more than a semi-effective regional power has to make China reconsider whether it is really a super power or simply another also-ran.

China won't attack the US directly. They don't want a full on confrontation as they are still dependent on US dollars for the next few decades. China wants us out of the Pacific. Taiwan will be the first step. From there they will expand their sphere of influence mainly by intimidation through the Philippines, India, Australia, and finally over Japan and S. Korea. The presence of 75,000 US troops between Japan and S. Korea is the big deterrent for China.

I believe India is the big target for China to secure safe passage of ME oil. Whether economic or military means, eventually China will take India. With India secure, China can prop up Iran as a ME proxy and secure all the oil resources they need. Iran acts as an antagonist in the ME, forcing the US to expend military resources for our own oil needs while China makes mostly economic moves in Africa, securing rare-earth minerals.

Russia is an afterthought at this point. Technologically they can't compete with the US, Western Europe, or China. Militarily their only option is nuclear. China could prop them up so that they can continue antagonizing Western Europe, but ultimately that would be Putin playing second fiddle and being exploited. He won't go for that. Putin will agree to stay away from China, and China will agree to leave him alone - for the time being.

What the US needs is for Western Europe to be able to stand on their own against Russia (which it looks like they can if forced to) so that the US can focus on playing the long game with China. With the exception of the military, the US has a lot of catching up to do and we are only hurting ourselves by restricting our economic growth through climate driven agenda while allowing China to benefit from the very same policies.

China has been at war and "attacking" us for about a decade now. Body count is over 2million and counting.
Covid front and Fentanyl front.

(11-22-2022 12:57 PM)Todor Wrote:  Lol, we’ve given Ukraine money and weapons for almost 10 years and people act like it’s some miracle they haven’t folded yet, when in reality, NATO is outspending Russias annual military budget every few months in Ukraine alone. And I doubt we even know about half of what has been sent/spent. That’s all fine, but as soon as we turn the tap off, it’s lights out for Ukraine. It’s all a matter of how much of our money we want to throw down that corruption and fraud rat hole.

Our military budget is currently 1.64 trillion. We spent 2.3 TRILLION in Afganastan (most of it AFTER we took over). We spent over 2 trillion in Iraq (again, mostly after the war was over).

The Russian defense budget has been about 45 billion---but they just bumped it to 84 billion (likely a temporary hike due to the ongoing war). The Chinese defense budget is 229 billion. So---together China and Russia generally spend around 300 billion a year---and we spend more that 5 times that amount EVERY YEAR trying to defend against the two. Seems to me that the one time cost of 50 billion or so we have spent giving Ukraine the ammo they need to blow up as much front line Russian equipment as the Russians want to send into Ukraine seems like the most cost effective thing we have done in decades. I mean---we have a defense department still building brand new Littoral Combat Ships ships that they have already determined are useless and need to be retired (despite being virtually brand new). So---yeah---letting Ukraine blow up Russian front line equipment with old US weapons stockpiles that were about to go out of date seems like one of the Defense Departments better fiscal moves.

The main news is how much money we are giving Ukraine—the only thing interrupting it is the absolute incessant news about how bad Russia is supposedly doing in this war. It’s a little odd how forceful the messaging is. It doesn’t even feel like reporting. It’s just more doom and gloom about the minutiae of Russias supposed problems. In other words, anything to keep the money flowing. If people here thought it was hopeless, they might not go along with the billions flowing.

Ukraine appears to have had a lot of infrastructure damage caused missiles. It makes me wonder who is doing the bombing. It can’t be Russia, because anyone who watches the news knows that Russia first ran out of missiles 6 months ago. And again 5 months ago, etc etc etc. And tanks, and planes, and guns, and bullets, and uniforms, and rations… It feels a little like those translated North Korean articles they print excerpts of here.

Zelenskyy Asks for Another $55 Billion to Pay for Budget, Infrastructure, Government Expenses and Pensions of Ukraine