NimdaQA @ NimdaQA @lemmy.world Posts 1Comments 151Joined 5 days ago
Think of it however you want, someone else here stated that freezing it is just means that all that aid goes into Trump’s pockets instead which is certainly a good argument for unfreezing this aid and sending it into Ukraine anyways even if it won’t achieve much in the end.
Personally I think it is smarter if Europe keeps their stockpiles in country and prepare for a future war with Russia and the American aid gets sent to NATO allies instead.
The US did halt lend lease shipments to the USSR in the middle of Stalingrad in order to support actions in Tunisia.
I wondered what he smoked and where would I be able to get some.
I’d suspect the five million ain’t going to be worth much after Trump is done.
I mean the US already sent too much to Ukraine. European members can hardly add much, UK sent bascially all of their SPGs to Ukraine for example. 6 months ago, Ukraine used 15% of US ATACMS stockpile. US six months ago only had 2,000 ATACMS left. Iskander production last year was around 360 (which outpaced use) and Russia has plans to produce 750 this year. US and their European allies are having their stockpiles bled dry and why send more for a country that clearly ain’t going to make it? As far as I can tell, most Russian units aren’t even in Ukraine and I suspect late April is going to be interesting considering I see signs of a possible Re-Invasion of Ukraine but take that with a grain of salt.
The VA is already understaffed, how is making them more understaffed going to make them more efficient?