re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict

quote:

---

Because they read the same headlines over and over from the same dumb websites. Most probably think we are shipping billions in cash and don't understand the weapons transfer deal.

---

Answers here always focus on weapons transfers or drawdowns while minimizing the rest, but drawdowns have only been around 1/5 of the of the $53 billion in aid authorized through the May 2022 aid bill. The recent bill includes $11.88 billion to replenish previous drawdown weapons transferred – “$11.88 billion to replenish US stocks of equipment sent to Ukraine through Presidential drawdown authority.”

Around $27 billion or so of the $53 billion was tagged as humanitarian or financial aid with the rest considered military aid. A majority of that remaining $26/$27 billion tagged as military aid authorized probably has been handled through drawdown process and increasing funding for US troops in NATO and NATO in general, but that still leaves a far majority of the total aid authorized through May without as much reporting or tracking as the drawdowns.

The drawdowns have had the best reporting on each transfer. This probably more of a military versus standard govt reporting/processes, but not getting same type of reporting or independent audit process added to May bill along with House just adding $7/$8 billion onto May bill on top of what President requested as needed and then Congress bumping it up again with the current omnibus bill to push bill through with current congress are what have kept me from supporting the amount of $.

Maybe the stuff confirming the Hunter Biden problem was too soon to affect adding better controls and reporting to the March bill, but adding independent audit/reporting process to May bill should have happened. Request to do so shouldn’t have been controversial and then shouldn’t have taken a change in house leadership to finally accomplish with the Ukraine aid included in recent omnibus bill (or had billions tacked on again above President’s request). The timing, amount, Nancy’s addition, politics, and our own inflation problems made a lot of May bill worthy of suspect. Ukraine also brings its own ethical problems to any money we send to prop up its govt.

I was much more on board with forcing Russia to have to drag this out at a rate closer to what we were spending initially. We are basically hiring Ukraine at this point not just transferring them some weapons and giving them some training. As for the endgame maybe rebuilding Ukraine uses mostly seized Russian money not ours, but breaking Putin is different than breaking Russia. I don’t think we have a true plan to prevent having problems from any chaos from economic crisis or regime change that could take place in Russia.

Edit: notiger, If you want to award me additional medals for defending the political board just go ahead and tack them on for me over there as you post there a lot more than I even visit the board…