War in Ukraine

#87,801
#87,801
LouderVol said:
does anyone know how this system wll work?

The US government doesn't make any weapons. yet alone the ones they sell.
so does the US government buy the weapon from a US source, either new or from a while ago, and then turn around and sell that?
or does the US government just ok the sale from US manufacturers straight to NATO/someone else?
do they have some sort of middle man mark up?
Is this just surplus arms manufacturing? does it coincide with our orders for any of the same weapon systems?
Click to expand...

The government permits the sales. In this case appears to be US manufacturers to NATO transaction, then NATO forwards weapons to Ukraine.

Of note, our Raytheons etc. will sell to anyone... Greed is good. Right? (Enter flag saluting)

We excel at blowing **** up.

When and if our gubment decides it wants Ukraine to win, Ukraine will win. It's really been that way from the start. Russia is pathetic... All they have is the nuclear threat.
 
Last edited:
#87,803
#87,803
So I’m a bit puzzled by this somewhat bipartisan victory lap on NATO providing the funding for arms to Ukraine. Forget GDP, we all remember whom the single largest funds source to NATO is don’t we?

NATO Spending by Country 2025

Discover population, economy, health, and more with the most comprehensive global statistics at your fingertips.
worldpopulationreview.com worldpopulationreview.com

IMG_4079.png
 
#87,804
#87,804
NorthDallas40 said:
So I’m a bit puzzled by this somewhat bipartisan victory lap on NATO providing the funding for arms to Ukraine. Forget GDP, we all remember whom the single largest funds source to NATO is don’t we?

NATO Spending by Country 2025

Discover population, economy, health, and more with the most comprehensive global statistics at your fingertips.
worldpopulationreview.com worldpopulationreview.com

View attachment 755562
Click to expand...
I see you are an Old Spice guy like me…lol


@hog88
 
#87,805
#87,805
NorthDallas40 said:
So I’m a bit puzzled by this somewhat bipartisan victory lap on NATO providing the funding for arms to Ukraine. Forget GDP, we all remember whom the single largest funds source to NATO is don’t we?

NATO Spending by Country 2025

Discover population, economy, health, and more with the most comprehensive global statistics at your fingertips.
worldpopulationreview.com worldpopulationreview.com

View attachment 755562
Click to expand...
There you go thinking again.

If you stop, then you'll understand MAGA.

Also: Old Spice sucks. Period.
 
#87,808
#87,808
Orangeburst said:
I am just joking..I brought up English Leather and Old Spice with Hog weeks ago.
I did havea bottle of EL in the drawer for at least a decade..lol
Click to expand...
Reminds me of a funny family story. My dad bought my mom some perfume one year for Mother's Day or her birthday. Don't remember which. She got mad. And he said well I thought you liked it you have so much of it. And she said "you buy it for me once a year and I never wear it. That's why I have so much of it."
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol, NorthDallas40 and Orangeburst
#87,809
#87,809
volfanhill said:
Reminds me of a funny family story. My dad bought my mom some perfume one year for Mother's Day or her birthday. Don't remember which. She got mad. And he said well I thought you liked it you have so much of it. And she said "you buy it for me once a year and I never wear it. That's why I have so much of it."
Click to expand...

nm..lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanhill
#87,812
#87,812
lawgator1 said:
I have my suspicions but admit there's no evidence specifically of that at this point.

THERE IS, however, undeniable evidence that Putin preferred Trump over HRC and so at least some Russian assets and information were deployed to help Trump win. At absolute best, Putin recognized Trump's naivete and believed (correctly for a time) that he could manipulate Trump through appeal to ego. It is not necessary to evaluate the worst possible reasons for it because Trump is lame duck.
Click to expand...
No, that was media propaganda and election interference, too. 😂 you still believe that lie. He preferred Hillary. A lot of Russian-affiliated money went to the Clinton foundation, too. And don’t forget Bill’s half a million dollars for a one-hour speech, paid by the Russian bank working on the Russian purchase of the uranium company.
 
Last edited:
#87,814
#87,814
BeardedVol said:
Click to expand...

"President Trump on Monday suggested that first lady Melania Trump convinced him that Russian President Vladimir Putin has continually backed out of his promises over a possible peace deal with Ukraine. "

Lol. No sh!t sherlock. What a tool.

www.foxnews.com

Trump reveals Melania's key role in dealing with Putin on Ukraine war

President Trump threatens Putin with 100% tariffs if no Ukraine peace deal is reached within 50 days, while confirming arms sales to NATO to support Ukrainian resistance.
www.foxnews.com www.foxnews.com
 
#87,816
#87,816
Heh. Seems there's a Russian word for TACO.

President Donald Trump may have expected a Russian shudder of fear after he threatened to impose “very severe tariffs” if Moscow didn’t agree a ceasefire in Ukraine. Instead, his comments appear to have prompted a collective public shrug.

Calling Trump's statements “very serious,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Tuesday that Russia needs “time to analyze” them.

But investors in the Russian capital who had been gearing up for tougher measures instead embraced a 50-day grace period on tariffs set by Trump on Monday and the Moscow Stock Exchange was up 2.7% after it opened Tuesday morning.

Oil prices also fell by more than $1 after the announcement, hinting that investors don't think Trump will follow through on his threat to impose the tariffs.

1000000115.gif
 
#87,817
#87,817
Gv4OIgQWoAEc6QF
 
#87,818
#87,818
MontyPython said:
Heh. Seems there's a Russian word for TACO.

President Donald Trump may have expected a Russian shudder of fear after he threatened to impose “very severe tariffs” if Moscow didn’t agree a ceasefire in Ukraine. Instead, his comments appear to have prompted a collective public shrug.

Calling Trump's statements “very serious,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Tuesday that Russia needs “time to analyze” them.

But investors in the Russian capital who had been gearing up for tougher measures instead embraced a 50-day grace period on tariffs set by Trump on Monday and the Moscow Stock Exchange was up 2.7% after it opened Tuesday morning.

Oil prices also fell by more than $1 after the announcement, hinting that investors don't think Trump will follow through on his threat to impose the tariffs.

View attachment 755750
Click to expand...


Whatever gave them that idea?
 
#87,821
#87,821
TVOLS said:
www.newsweek.com

Russia strikes NATO ally's factory in "deliberate" attack

"Putin's criminal war is getting closer to our borders," Polish Foreign Minister, Radosław Sikorski, said on Wednesday.
www.newsweek.com www.newsweek.com

I see no problem with this; it's in a war zone. Having said that the west should not impose restrictions on Targets in Russia.
Click to expand...
RE the attack
1752683291107.gif

The bald dwarf has 50 days (at least that’s what is being said this time … again…) to get validation for his war on Ukraine. If he can goad Poland into retaliation then he is “at war with NATO”.
 
#87,823
#87,823
#87,824
#87,824
NorthDallas40 said:
So I’m a bit puzzled by this somewhat bipartisan victory lap on NATO providing the funding for arms to Ukraine. Forget GDP, we all remember whom the single largest funds source to NATO is don’t we?

NATO Spending by Country 2025

Discover population, economy, health, and more with the most comprehensive global statistics at your fingertips.
worldpopulationreview.com worldpopulationreview.com

View attachment 755562
Click to expand...

That is defense expenditures, not funding to NATO.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top