British weapon supply flights, the first taking off before the invasion started, continue to supply Ukraine with weapons with which to defend itself against invading Russian forces.
The supply flights started before the invasion and have not stopped since. However, they now land in Poland near the Ukrainian border.
The UK continues to supply #Ukraine with weapons with which to defend itself against Russia. The image shows an RAF transport flight that took place today. The supply flights started before the invasion and have not stopped. They now land near the border in Poland. pic.twitter.com/RNoT1hDUdz
— UK Defence Journal (@UKDefJournal) April 2, 2024
UK military assistance to Ukraine
To date, the United Kingdom has committed over £2.3 billion in military assistance to Ukraine, with £250 million of this amount earmarked for the International Fund for Ukraine. The Government has indicated its intention to surpass this financial commitment in the upcoming 2023/24 fiscal year and is expected to provide further details in the forthcoming Spring Statement.
As the second-largest contributor of military assistance, the UK has provided lethal weaponry such as anti-tank missiles, artillery, air defence systems, armoured fighting vehicles, and anti-structure munitions, including three M270 long-range multiple launch rocket systems. In January 2023, the UK announced a substantial increase in combat support, with the provision of 14 Challenger II main battle tanks.
Moreover, the UK has contributed over 200,000 units of non-lethal aid, including body armour, helmets, night vision equipment, medical supplies, and winter clothing. In November 2022, the Ministry of Defense confirmed the delivery of the first of three retired Sea King search and rescue helicopters to Ukraine.
You can read about the specifics of UK military aid to Ukraine here.
There is some debate as to the level of US support for Ukraine and the open-ended nature of the policy. My reaction to that line of discussion would be the repercussions on World peace if the US and UK stopped military shipments.
It seems as if only factions in the US (MAGA supporters, Trump, most Republicans, many members of Congress) want to stop shipments.
I have never heard debate in the UK that we should do so also.
It’s like The USA and Hungary that are having this debate, 30 other countries seems to have no issue.
The Poles went wobbly about continuing mil aid some months ago due to some issue about faltering grain shipments from UKR to the EU – I may have that a bit wrong. Think it all blew over though.
I would disown this country if we abandoned Ukraine.
I think that Ben & Boris were driving the support agenda put forward by the military in the UK. The jury seems out now as to whether there is the same sort of support with the current leadership or indeed if any potential future leaders will ever put their weight behind Ukraine.
Rishi has visited Ukraine several times and seems to relish providing military assistance – training and kit – for him it is Britain on the world stage doing stuff, being a force for good. For him it may deflect attention away from the impoverished state of our own forces.
Grant Shapps, I am not so sure about. He is just a Yes man.
Perhaps. Rishi understands the economic arguments which make me wonder if he is able to see the cost benefit of ensuring Russia loses this battle. Shapps is not noted for marvelous achievements in his previous departments so I’m not that hopeful.
It at least means the impoverished state of British forces will not be put to the test which if we stop supporting will inevitably put article 5 to the test. Poland is very much stating war is inevitable unless Russia is defeated (whatever form that takes). As I say to our American friends defeat can be in effect a reality long before any actual threat comes to your door. An even bigger lesson for us as it would only take the loss of Norway to put us in an almost indefensible scenario and without an effective Article 5 response that… Read more »
We hope that Ukraine gets enough support soon to tilt things back into its favour and more permanently. We don’t want Putin and his friends to feel emboldened, and resupplied, to try whatever is next for him all the while nearly the whole world is distracted by the Olympics which Russia has been ostracised from. He’d be wilful enough to try it on but wouldn’t his allies in China , Iran, North Korea and elsewhere like to be in charge of things? It was good to hear that France is offering a lot of their older and still workable equipment… Read more »
Good post! Sky News has a feature alleging that Britain does not have a national war plan and has not had one since the Cold War ended – probably true.
I find it hard to believe Putin would ever invade a NATO country, but he may just be mad enough to do so – he is an unpredictable psychopath.
There are quite a number of people in the UK who think we shouldn’t be helping Ukraine. it seems to range from people who think Putin is wonderful and those that are outraged about the government spending there money and then the anti war types. A few of them even seem to pop up on here from time to time
Really? I am very surprised. It must be a tiny minority who are fan boys of Putin.
The US stopped military shipments some time ago, I’m not convinced they will restart.
Oh I suspect they will regardless. The question is when. There will become a time when the US see it as in their interests regardless of who is in power.
The US already sees it in their interest, it’s Matt gates and MTG that don’t. I don’t see them changing their mind any time soon if ever.
Indeed most Republicans still support shipments, the only argument is how they are paid for, Trump ironically has stated it should be lend lease but substantially paid for by Russian funds which however would be a legal problem beyond from interest accumulated.
MTG played to her intellectual strengths, eg the total lack of them by starting the motion to vacate the speaker. Johnson knows if he is to survive he needs democrat support which plays right into their agenda. He plays ball on Ukraine or he is out of a job. Also the bi pattern efforts to bypass the speaker and bring the aid package to the floor is gathering steam. If it goes through, which it probably will, he will be on the wrong side of history.’ He needs to appear to get a win out of Biden for the folks… Read more »
US prosperity and influence depends on global trade and stability. Grownups know that. The tangerine toddler believes that isolationism will be seen as putting America First by the poorly educated voters who support him. He brings old views on old news as NATO itself says that the 2010 agreement is on track and surely would not if it wasn’t so. Another #45 term means that CCP can do whatever they want in the Indo-Pacific as NATO is busy Supporting Ukraine without USA. The only member state to invoke Article 5 was USA which proves where their national interest lies to… Read more »
They will. I am sure Congress will soon sign the bill to release the lastest large shipment.
The US surely does not want to surrender its global leadership role.
Many countries are accelerating levels of production. The French Caesar has reached the 6 per mont level of production. At the end of the year, the 12 per month level will be reached.
Europe and America are so massive it takes very little of an increase to completely overwhelm anything Russia can do, everyone just need to pull a little weight. France is stepping up now just need the USA to match
Haha, we’ll see! I am convinced USA will step up, for 2 reasons: friendship toward Europe and influence. Having America aside is always better. If not, we will brace ourselves and prepare to go to war next year. We will be ready. I hope Germany can do what it takes regarding tanks, because at the moment, we only do mid-size tanks in France. But we will go in Ukraine, die if need be, but we can no longer sit asside while Ukrainians take all the glory. And we cannot have an army unprepared and undertrained compared to Russia, it is… Read more »
Matt, do you believe all this? UK and other European nations would be ready to go to war with Russia next year without US support?
What does mid-size tanks in France mean? Leclerc is a full size MBT.
NATO would not sanction war unless a NATO country was invaded – and Ukraine is non-NATO.
Hi Graham, Yes I do. Nato is great, but we will not seat on the border fighting till the last Ukrainian. It make no sense to me that we have a Russia on overdrive next door. We have to go, confront them and send them back to where they belong, out of here. Otheways, you know as much as I do what will happen: Nato will fall appart, EU will soon do the same. We can no longer ask everything from Ukrainians, we must prepare our minds, strength and stamina and be ready. That’s by the way the whole purpose… Read more »
Thanks Math. I am guessing you are French? Jaguar is just an armoured recce vehicle with a secondary role as a fire support vehicle (so some may call it a light tank but it has only a 40mm cannon), but is in current production. Leclerc MBT is in service so should not be dismissed – is it 222 Leclercs in service (with 184 more in storage?). True that production ended in 2007, but Nexter claim they could reopen the line. In the meantime, 200 of those Leclercs are currently being upgraded to the XLR standard. I cannot see any scenario… Read more »
Yes I am French. We will see. For the Leclerc, a lot has to be done if we want to restore old tanks. Nexter can reopen the line in 2 or 3 years most likely. So a bit long time away. WW3 I don’t know, but a serious fight is possible, in which a firm line will be set. This is something we are preparing for. USA is leaving Europe. What else than a war will Russia need to take us seriously. Vladimir believes that Russian people can bully whoever they want in Europe if America is not watching. What… Read more »
We can’t afford not to supply UKR. Russia must be stopped from invading her neighbours.
The U.K. can’t still be the 2nd largest supporter of Ukraine. Germany has put a lot in compared to the U.K. in the past few months. France has started working out what it has given in monetary value as they didn’t seem to bother adding it up before.
So many different sites give different answers to aid depending what they included.
Most seem to have it as
USA, Germany, France, U.K
Percentage of GDP tells a different story with the smaller countries giving a lot more.
That was my guess, except unsure about France. Us Brits are so used to Government double-think-speak-multi-spin announce the same thing at least 10 times, that we can be convinced we’re the 2nd highest contributor.
Going by the Kiel institute tracker the UK is overall the 3rd highest contributor behind the US and Germany. France…is 14th.
Thanks for providing evidence to our intuition!
Yes. The idea that France is sending much military aid is a complete scam. The Germans who have upped their game in that area have been bucketing on the French ( rightly so) who whilst talking themselves up have been doing relatively little.
Politico EU has a number of articles on it. Recommended reading.
Not completely true though. France is steadily increasing it’s output. Many equipments we provide are undisclosed, same with the Brits. And the most interesting thing is not visible. We are improving our nuclear deterrence at a fast pace. This helps in a way nobody else can. USA cannot take risks for it’s cities over Ukrainian conflict. France, a nuclear power, cannot let Russia win. This determination helps cooling minds on the playing field and the message is very well received by Russian decision makers. Next year, we will have soldiers in Ukraine, we are currently preparing them. And Russia knows… Read more »
Since 2014, or since early 2022?
UK help has IIRC been long term, for example Operation Orbital which launched waaaayyy back in 2015 to train Ukraine forces when Russia started annexing stuff. So while in money terms the UK is a strong third place, its given help in a timely way for a long period.
Countries have different metrics and some aid is long term economic and as opposed to immediate military.
Personally I couldn’t give a flying hoot who gets the political qudos of being the major supplier. As long as Ukraine gets what it needs in a timely fashion. We worry less about Putin’s red lines.’
People are dying while politicians play with themselves.
We are down to 4th in total pledges now however a lot of that it’s 5 year allocations from pulled EU funds. I don’t think the UK has pledged anything so far into the future yet. So it is not an apples to apples comparison.
Apples and apples it is not. Still can’t get a proper answer. The EU fund makes it complicated as France put a lot into that.
Whatever it is the U.K. should be doing more. We should have basic armoured vehicle production running, missiles, ammo and anything else that’s useful.
We’re third largest supporter, but in real terms it is hard to quantify. NLAW has destroyed up to 40% of all destroyed Russian tanks. Add in Brimstone and British donated Javelins and that number is even higher. Britain has trained more Ukrainian soldiers than any other country and is Ukraines largest supplier of drones. France has given a few SCALP but they are hugely outnumbered by the number of Storm Shadow we have given, we kickstarted western MBT donations, M270 MLRS, Starstreak, and by September last year had given 300k shells which is more than most countries. The effect that… Read more »
It’s also becoming increasingly clear that most of the intelligence is coming from the UK as well as much of the leadership
Moldova, Armenia are areas were France is keeping things cooler, right now. Russia was trying to do things. They cannot anymore. In Tansnistria, Russians are fearing being send back to were they belong. Rightly so. We canne tolerate more Russian provocations.
Must keep support for Ukraine going, difficult without US support has not receiving Ammunition .But to hold back now from helping them it will of been pointless .The Bear is taking ground now and won’t hold back.At the same time the UK government most increased our Defence spending now as tomorrow is to late 🙄 🇬🇧
I fear, and have done for some time ,that UKR will suffer a slow and painful demise unless the West (and that means the US) commit to support them properly. That means both in terms of equipment and ammunition now and the establishment of an ‘urgent’, if not a ‘wartime’ economy. Europe appears to be trying, the UK effort is limited at least in terms of the public statements. An election is far more important. If UKR loses the potential opposition will be emboldened and adjacent to much more of the NATO border. They will not be able to beat… Read more »
I had not heard the UK effort before being characterised as ‘limited’ – we supplied weapons before the invasion (NLAW) – no-one else did. We were the first to offer tanks and fighter pilot training. Depending on what stat you read we are the 2nd or 3rd (or maybe 4th) largest supplier in the world. How is that ‘limited’?
A mis-understanding I hope. Limited refers to the ‘Wartime economy’ element, e.g. the build up of the ammunition and production capability, it was not meant to say the donations to date have been limited, although obviously they are finite.
We have given lots, but little or nothing has been replaced. What happens next?
We increased our 155mm shell production by a factor of 8 and LMM and NLAW production are up massively. A wide variety of uk firms are supplying drones and massively ramping up but we are not crowing about any of this. The UK is not out trying to grab headlines like Macron and MAGA but it’s a mistake to underestimate the UK contribution or believe that nothing is being done on the industrial side. We are just not making stupid comments like ‘France is heading for a war time economy’ (while spending less that 2% of GDP on defence)
Please show where the 8x 155 production is stated and the NLAW numbers quoted.
There’s an article on here about it. Now finding out what production was originally so it can be seen what 8x that is is much more difficult
Multiple articles including ukdj. I can’t post a link but you can google 8 fold increase.
I did that and found the ‘8-fold increase’ article. It does not, and nor has any other piece I have seen, make it clear from what base that represents, as you said so yourself in the thread that followed the article. ‘How difficult would it be to do a 100 fold increase’. I guess the answer is hard and expensive. Not sure how many of the 300,000 shells contributed by the UK were 155mm, nor how long it will take to replace them, not forgetting the UKR requirement is ‘now’. I stand by my original statements entirely. It is the… Read more »
I see. Thanks and you have my apologies. I have seen no consolidated list of equipment and munitions that have been ordered to replace donated stocks. Some of what was gifted may have been surplus to requirements, and some was not. Interesting point.
Some gifted items have been replaced in an unconventional way – 32 tracked AS-90s (20 complete equipments and 12 mostly complete units) replaced by 14 wheeled Archers.
BAE is increasing 155mm production by a factor of 8, is increasing 5.56mm, 7.62mm, 105mm and 81mm production, and restarted 30mm Rarden production. M777 production is also being restarted.
Thales is either doubling or quadrupling NLAW production, doubling LMM production and restarted and is now doubling Starstreak production.
MBDA UK is tripling CAMM production and increasing Brimstone production.
Drone production in the UK has also increased massively
Regarding the 155mm production being increased eightfold; do we have any idea what the original production rate was, how many shells we made a month?
If we were only making 1,000 shells a month then a x8 increase isn’t very significant.
No one has identified the base level that the 8x claim is based upon.
Does anyone here have any ideas or theories how much it would be as a base level?
I read something the other day that the US was producing 14,000 shells a month last year, increased to 20,000 now and aiming to increase again to 40,000 a month by the end of this year.
Given that the US was starting around 14,000 I can’t imagine us producing more than, say, 5,000 a month at the moment. Even that seems optimistic.
Increased CAMM production has nothing to do with the UK, rather Poland.
Re NLAW, the last I saw was an NLAW contract for 2-300 this year with production doubling in 2025. I might be a year out. Either way a long tome to make good what we have given to the UKR.
CAMM for Poland will be made in Poland, not by MBDA. Therefore if MBDA want to triple production, it has to be done in the two UK and one Italian factory.
7,000 NLAWs were ordered in late 2022 for delivery between 2023 and 2026. As of the end of 2023, 6,900 NLAWs had been donated to Ukraine but is probably a bit higher now so the missiles will be almost replaced on a 1:1 basis.
Sorry looks like I may have been 2 years out, time flies, depressingly, based on an MoD Press Release in December 2022
Appears 500 in 2023 and thousands by 2026.
Impressed if they achieve it.
Still I will put my hands up to being a little mistaken.
General Ben Hodges has been clear that apart from the short term politics the USA has been failing the leadership role by not stating the clear strategy and objective as ruzzian defeat. Standing with Ukraine for as long as it takes sounds reasonable but isn’t clear. Only ruzzian defeat and unconditional surrender in Ukraine will deliver peace in Europe for generations to come. Along with reparations and repatriation, obviously. It’s fine for Mr Stoltenburg not to be aggressive on behalf of NATO members because Article 5 doesn’t apply but the heads of countries supporting Ukraine must be much clearer especially… Read more »
Increase even more the UK aid to Ukraine with the catastrophic situation of the UK armed force is a non sense, current aid is enough. We need more money for the British forces.
All hysteria about Russia invading Europe is funny, even they,ve problems in Ukraine being a few kilometres from its borders and they say they Will invade all Europe, my god !! Please a little of common sense, Russia is totally unable to invade more than half of Ukraine. .
Money spent on Ukraine wouldn’t be spent on U.K. forces instead if it wasn’t sent to Ukraine.
U.K. forces are getting a budget cut of £3 billion as stated in the Budget.
The U.K. knows better than most what a difference gifts and loans can make as it’s probably what stopped the U.K. losing WW2.
Allied countries sent more aid as a percentage of gdp to the Soviet Union in WW2
That may have been true to start with, that this is extra money, but now it’s being laundered through the MOD budget it counts toward the headline percentage of GDP. So it’s covering up cuts in the MOD budget while still allowing HMG to say we are spending 2.1% or whatever.
UK spending 2.3% total but about 2.1% on UK military
That’s just creative accounting and had it not included the aid something would have been put in the defence budget to keep it above the 2%. Had Ukraine not happened defence would get an even bigger cut with more things added to the budget to keep the numbers looking correct. This government has shown us over 14 years that defence is not something they want to fund. Take out the nuclear, pensions and all the other stuff thats been added to the defence budget since 2010 and the U.K. defence budget is around 1.3% of gdp from some sources, some… Read more »
I don’t think it is just accounting. I believe that it’s harder to fiddle the figures than you think. If a particular fiddle was easy, Osborne would have already fiddled it. I think it’s the 2.X% of GDP that’s political absolute. Sunak isn’t defunding Defence as a goal, he’s doing it because he can within the headline number. That means spending on Defence is headline minus total fiddle of which Ukraine is an easy one. There are also issues with increasing capability, especially capability for the future. You would like to think that HMG would increase expenditure to fund new… Read more »
I’ve done my best to dig into the the supernumeries and I’m not getting anything like 1.3% core convensional. As best as I can see it, if we ignore Ukraine, we are looking at 2.1%, inflated by “other stuff”. Then there’s money on pensions, maybe £1.5bn-£2bn. Nuclear is about £5bn-£6bn. There’s UK security spend, and spend on operations, eg UN peacekeeping (which wasn’t included pre-2014). And it’s not just money that’s gone on weapons for Ukraine, there’s training Ukrainains and providing intelligence, etc. Back in 2015 the Osborne supernumeries were estimated at about £3bn and now, because of Ukraine, it’s… Read more »
If Putin succeeds in Ukraine he will not stop He wants to see the old Soviet Union and Warsaw pact borders restored. He has put the Russian economy on a wartime footing which he can sustain with his oil wealth. Like all bullies Putin will not pick on anyone their own size. But he quite rightly thinks the West is weak and hasn’t the stomach for a conflict and will be more emboldened if Trump wins the US elections. The UK needs to wake up Now and increase Defence spending all the years of cuts since the end of the… Read more »
A rightful rant you are spot on, Rishi is fine though, he has his a green Card after all. I hope like in the later 30s we are doing a lot more in defence than is being revealed but unlike back then I have grave doubts. It was a close run thing back then so on this occasion it’s looking like Britain and Poland are reversing their positions and we will be attacking tanks with the Household cavalry minus the it tanks while they hold back the hoarders with modern technology.
From 1934 we were rearming in earnest and were very public about it. We are not rearming now.
There is a lot of propaganda on all sides. Sifting through it is a tiresome exercise. From a Nato perspective, Finland and Sweden are useful additions. A “useful” distraction would be China staking claim to Russian territory it covets for natural resources. Sadly this site does not cover geopolitics in depth IMO. With globalisation ending, the pieces on the chessboard are moving very quickly. Trump will turn it all upside down, and maybe that will be a good thing. A neutral Ukraine as a “buffer” state would suit many. Removal of Zelenski would force negotiation, and acceptance that Crimea and… Read more »
That is Trump working as the Putin stoodge he always was (Just like Farage and co here).
With proper backing the Ukraine could reclaim its rightful legal borders.
Whether it will get that is the question with the corruption and anti-democratic antics of the far right (Trump and Leave) destroying the West from within.
I trust ‘London’ isn’t your surname Chris, do you work for the Mayor’s office by any chance, this is just the sort of leftie London centric retoric that he churns out on a daily basis…… Let’s take a minute to actually look at the situation in Ukraine, without churning up the tired old left wing Brexit , Trump, Farage argument for everything that’s wrong with the world. As much as I hate to say it, the end game will eventually be a negotiated settlement, Donbas and the Crimean peninsula will be lost, the Russians will probably withdraw from the land… Read more »
Just to add, I’m sure senior echelon elements within the Russian military are horrified by the gutting of their armed forces and it’s conversion into a Soviet WW2 type low tech steamroller….
Except that will simply NOT be the end of it, Putin will not give up on taking much more of Ukraine, be it now or in a few years. If we can’t see that clearly by now then we truly are deluding ourselves about our own chances of being part of a free and independent Europe. His Master plan is not only about personal sainthood it’s also about trying to build a Russia that can be an equal to China. In that latter scenario Russia has never been weaker which means doubling down on a compliant Europe separated from the… Read more »
Putin’s an idiot, if he had played the game Russia would be in the EU and NATO, it would be a super Poland with as much oil as Saudi Arabia. It would be one of the most powerful countries in the world. Now it will always be a third world Joke.
You’re right Jim, Putin has cemented Russia’s place as China’s lapdog.
I have or sometime worried that UKR will suffer a slow and painful defeat without long term and continued western support, and that means the United States.
Europe is trying, or at least is making the right noises. The UK is distracted now by a forthcoming election which is obviously much more important.
All need to think about a ‘Wartime’ economy, or at least an ‘Urgent’ one.
If UKR lose the NATO border with Russia will get a lot longer and will be very expensive to maintain.
As they would then walk into Moldova it would place them n the heart of Europe and well placed to intimate all around them. Divide and conquer the oldest trick in the book and was always the main goal of Putin externally while selling it as humbling NATO internally, a new Napoleon is born. The Baltics and Finland will certainly feel very distant borders in such a circumstance.
I see that Denmark has agreed to sell surplus F-16 aircraft to Argentina. In my opinion all surplus NATO F-16 aircraft should be allocated to Ukraine – even if other nations (such as the UK) have to make a financial contribution to facilitate this if necessary. Such a development would come with the additional benefit of frustrating a old enemy’s plans of course.
As Captain Picard would say – make it so!
In fairness to Denmark, they’re doing both- selling to Argentina and donating to Ukraine. Personally, while I see the importance of defending Ukraine, I also see the strategic importance of keeping Argentina on Western equipment. 20 F-16s are never going to make a dent on the Falklands. The last thing we want is for China to get their hooks into them, providing loans to build up their military further across all branches, and get concessions on the disputed fishing and raw materials around the Falklands Islands themselves. While Ukraine is certainly an urgent crisis that we need to deal with,… Read more »
The USA has hundreds of jets sitting in the desert that could go to Argentina or Ukraine but I doubt we will see it.
Same with folks giving Germany a hard time over the few Taurus they have. The USA has 100s times more missiles and should be giving them.
I kind of take your point- it’s a waste to see that equipment just rotting away.
But I am also in favour of Europe getting their act together on defence again- I’m a little tired of the US having such an outsized influence on everything. Although, in the span of history, I’d say they’ve probably wielded their influence and power abut as responsibly as has ever been done. I’d ideally like to see UK/European industry spooling up, with US surplus filling the gap until we’re at capacity.
I agree, problem is the US goes out of its way to kill off industrial competitors then complains no one else is pulling their weight, the US has a law that makes it illegal to buy foreign kit then says NATO should pull resources on buying kit. Honestly they are worse than the French saying one thing doing something else. Just look at ASRAAM perfect example from the past. We were to develop the short range missiles while they developed the medium (AMRAAM) then they just stuck with sidewinders as it was US system.
The USA is unfortunately showing itself to be an unreliable ally. This also goes to weapon supply. I wish the U.K. government would recognise the benefit of domestic built systems even if they cost a little more. It’s not the MODs role to subsidise businesses. That should fall to the treasury and business depts. If a domestic product brings in 30% of the purchase price in tax take etc then the treasury should fund that as it will get that money back. It’s madness not to do it. Italy does it, the USA does it through tax breaks etc, most… Read more »
The talk over here is that some sort of ‘lend/lease’ to Ukraine would be ok with Republicans. Although many in the MAGA crowd are against even that. Sucks to be Ukraine having to deal with politics of the US in an election year. One good thing to come out of the situation is Europe is finally getting its Sh$t together albeit slowly. I really do wonder if Europe and the UK had been a bit more cautious with the ‘peace dividend’ of the 90’s, I guess with the UK the 2010 review didn’t help either, we would be seeing any… Read more »
Europe could be spending 4% of GDP on defence and it would not have stopped Putin. It was not the lack of military force in Europe or NATO but Putin belief that we would not use it. That’s what the MAGA republicans don’t realise because they are thick as s**t. It does not matter now that the USA spends $800 billion on defence. The fact they are unwillimg to send a few shells to Ukraine makes them look like pussies in the eyes of china. Xi will be thinking there is very little chance the USA will do anything over… Read more »
Can’t disagree with your comments. A vast majority of the Congress want to send aid to Ukraine. However it’s up to the speaker what bills get to the floor. This one for whatever reason is against aid to Ukraine. He is also firmly in the MAGA camp. It’s sad to see how thick the knee pads are when it comes to worshipping Trump.
As for doing nothing in the middle east, yes they did retaliate. Killed a few terrorists. Until Iran really steps out of line nothing of consequence will change.
Can’t help but notice that we can always seem to find money down the back of the couch to send to Ukraine but when it comes to things in this country, including our military, it’s always a matter of cuts and making do.