War in Ukraine

#77,901
#77,901
GLWQcJZWMAAFzcO
 
#77,908
#77,908
Do our elected representatives not realize America is 35 Trillion overdrawn? Ukraine needs money, or weapons that money provides. Well, we need money, too.
At some point we don't have any financial assistance to give. When do we decide the point is reached? Or do we just keep going status quo until we are bankrupt?
 
  • Like
Reactions: LibertyVol, Rocky_Top_Vol13, Vol since 77 and 2 others
#77,910
#77,910
McDad said:
Do our elected representatives not realize America is 35 Trillion overdrawn? Ukraine needs money, or weapons that money provides. Well, we need money, too.
At some point we don't have any financial assistance to give. When do we decide the point is reached? Or do we just keep going status quo until we are bankrupt?
Click to expand...
As has been pointed out here repeatedly, much of our assistance is giving them older weapons that we were eventually going to replace anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PKT_VOL and BeardedVol
#77,912
#77,912
Velo Vol said:
As has been pointed out here repeatedly, much of our assistance is giving them older weapons that we were eventually going to replace anyway.
Click to expand...

Well, technically that is true of all equipment but "eventually" can be a very long time. B-52s even if they decommission them when they say they will, could very well be in service for 100+ years. I believe the last one built was well over 60 years ago. Most tanks don't need to be replaced or artillery for very long time. Its all going over there to burn anyway, but no you don't have to replace them now.

The only weapons that would help them at this point is maybe anti-aircraft but they aren't getting that so that reduces it down to artillery shells, well, you can't print those either. So, what has Russia been doing for the last 6-9 months? Destroying **** that can't fire back i.e. artillery, tanks and now anti-aircraft systems.

Someone ran out of ammo i.e. the whole west. What is the going to give them that makes a difference? A nuclear sub?

Unless they are getting missiles for AA or artillery shells there really isn't much anyone can send them, not really. If only the U.S. could print meat and shells. So, instead of using shells, the Ukrainians just throw meat in the trenches to take shells, FABs, rockets, etc. to the forehead. The irony is all the shovel talk. They can always throw their helmets and pistols. 😂

9AA9Zb1XOvJbq.webp


All I know is those Ukrainians need to get in those trenches and stfu and give me a good show because I'm paying for it.
 
Last edited:
#77,915
#77,915
Velo Vol said:
Click to expand...

wtf is some of that?

still giving several billion to civil societies, I thought they needed weapons?

The amount is done as a loan, but the president can cancel half of the debt after November 15th 2024. They clearly did that so it couldn't be a talking point IN the election. BS political move.

45 days for who to lay a plan to stop Russian aggression? It better be Ukraine on their own.

Now we are also pushing for "Ukrainian Victory" in this bill, but doesn't go on to define what that means, what limits are there, and who decides all of that. they are starting to back door us doing more than just giving weapons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85 and McDad
#77,916
#77,916
Velo Vol said:
As has been pointed out here repeatedly, much of our assistance is giving them older weapons that we were eventually going to replace anyway.
Click to expand...
define eventually?

I posted about a month ago that the DoD has already admitted a 10 billion dollar deficit in their current supplies because we gave so much away. Some of this 60 billion is going to also be deficits.

by deficit they mean the DoD can not replace what we gave away in a meaningful time frame, and have to strategize around these lesser stockpiles.

and we aren't going to be able to replace like with like, or quantity for quantity. We are giving away 10k old rifles and replacing them with 5k new rifles that is going to take a year to back fill. The new and improved stuff is so new and improved to completely make up for the loss of quantity. Its especially short sighted because a lot of what makes the new rifles better are really add ons that wear out quickly, and require a lot more maintenance. so its not like its a one time cost/deficit we are getting ourselves into.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol since 77 and McDad
#77,918
#77,918
LouderVol said:
define eventually?

I posted about a month ago that the DoD has already admitted a 10 billion dollar deficit in their current supplies because we gave so much away. Some of this 60 billion is going to also be deficits.

by deficit they mean the DoD can not replace what we gave away in a meaningful time frame, and have to strategize around these lesser stockpiles.

and we aren't going to be able to replace like with like, or quantity for quantity. We are giving away 10k old rifles and replacing them with 5k new rifles that is going to take a year to back fill. The new and improved stuff is so new and improved to completely make up for the loss of quantity. Its especially short sighted because a lot of what makes the new rifles better are really add ons that wear out quickly, and require a lot more maintenance. so its not like its a one time cost/deficit we are getting ourselves into.
Click to expand...

Weapons systems designed for a land war against the USSR in Europe have been steadily replaced in the last 35 years. Russia's military is designed to fight that war. It makes no sense to not send those weapon systems to Ukraine to fight the war they were designed to be used in verse letting those weapon systems continue to rot and rust.

Over the past 35 years, the US has continued to evolve with new technology into a global combined arms military. These new weapon systems would continue to replace our Cold War weapon platforms regardless of whether Putin invaded.

Donating those outdated platforms to Ukraine is a win/win for the US.
 
#77,919
#77,919
PKT_VOL said:
Weapons systems designed for a land war against the USSR in Europe have been steadily replaced in the last 35 years. Russia's military is designed to fight that war. It makes no sense to not send those weapon systems to Ukraine to fight the war they were designed to be used in verse letting those weapon systems continue to rot and rust.

Over the past 35 years, the US has continued to evolve with new technology into a global combined arms military. These new weapon systems would continue to replace our Cold War weapon platforms regardless of whether Putin invaded.

Donating those outdated platforms to Ukraine is a win/win for the US.
Click to expand...
except we don't have those new weapon systems in enough numbers to matter. there is a big back log currently, and its only getting worse, and we don't have the fall back stockpiles we would need because we are giving them away. Its not like we were stockpiling just because we didn't have a dump to throw them away. we were stockpiling them because we knew we would need them in a big war. a big future war could still use those same rifles. oh yeah, its not like we are flush with money either, 34 trillion and counting.

Its not like an M16 or M4 stops working just because we have a new XM7 we are adopting. the weapons of yesterday are very capable of fighting the next war. Ukraine is a great example of that, there are freaking pre-WW1 Maxims being used. our stuff from the 80s has to be at least as capable as that.

the point of replacing those Cold War platforms was that we were able to do it on our own time, and we weren't throwing away the old stuff incase we ran out of the new or the new didn't work.

I am really curious about what systems you think we couldn't use in the next global combined arms war?
 
#77,922
#77,922
Rasputin_Vol said:
Is it a win for Ukraine? Does this prolong the inevitable and cause more men to die in the process?
Click to expand...
Sadly for you much to your chagrin Ukraine is choosing this fight. And contrary to the stooge idiotic narrative nobody is forcing them to fight. And finally you always seem to forget that this could end today if the orcs would pull back with their own sovereign territory boundaries and respect the sovereign boundaries they affirmed prior to their 2014 invasion
 
  • Like
Reactions: volbound1700, Orangeslice13 and BeardedVol
#77,924
#77,924
Something something, "Putin would never attack a NATO member' something something.


www.yahoo.com

Germany arrests two over military base attack plot for Russia

Investigators have arrested two German-Russian men on suspicion of spying for Russia and planning attacks in Germany -- including on US army targets -- to undermine military support for Ukraine, prosecutors said Thursday."The actions were intended, in particular, to undermine the military...
www.yahoo.com www.yahoo.com
 
#77,925
#77,925
BeardedVol said:
Something something, "Putin would never attack a NATO member' something something.


www.yahoo.com

Germany arrests two over military base attack plot for Russia

Investigators have arrested two German-Russian men on suspicion of spying for Russia and planning attacks in Germany -- including on US army targets -- to undermine military support for Ukraine, prosecutors said Thursday."The actions were intended, in particular, to undermine the military...
www.yahoo.com www.yahoo.com
Click to expand...

No, the correct narrative is Russia is weak economically, politically, and militarily so they are unable to threaten NATO as the Ukraine almost has them destroyed.

News at 5: Every country spies. Shocker. If they aren't spying, I would tell Putin wtf is wrong with you?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top